Comparing Methods to Identify Fungi in Tissue Samples
Author Information
Author(s): Rickerts Volker, Khot Prasanna D, Myerson David, Ko Daisy L, Lambrecht Evelyn, Fredricks David N
Primary Institution: University hospital, Frankfurt, Germany
Hypothesis
Can fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and quantitative PCR (qPCR) improve the identification of fungi in formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue specimens from patients with invasive fungal infections?
Conclusion
PCR is more sensitive for identifying the causative agents of invasive fungal infections, but FISH can still provide valuable information in certain cases.
Supporting Evidence
- PCR identified fungi in 28 of 40 samples (70%).
- FISH was positive in 19 of 40 samples (47.5%).
- FISH was highly sensitive in invasive yeast infections but less so for molds.
Takeaway
Scientists are trying to find better ways to identify fungi in tissue samples from sick patients, and they found that one method works better than another, but both can help.
Methodology
The study used fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and quantitative PCR (qPCR) to analyze tissue samples from patients with proven invasive fungal infections.
Limitations
The study faced challenges with non-specific fluorescence in samples with mold infections, which complicated the interpretation of results.
Participant Demographics
{"age":{"median":58.5,"range":"19-83"},"sex":{"female":12,"male":21},"underlying_disease":{"hematologic_malignancy":23,"organ_transplant":3,"AIDS":2,"other":5}}
Statistical Information
P-Value
0.001
Statistical Significance
p<0.05
Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Want to read the original?
Access the complete publication on the publisher's website