==== Front Biomed Res Int Biomed Res Int BMRI BioMed Research International 2314-6133 2314-6141 Hindawi 10.1155/2020/5434589 Research Article Diagnostic Accuracy of Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid Galactomannan for Invasive Aspergillosis Cao Xun-Jie 1 2 Li Ya-Ping 1 2 3 Xie Li-Min 1 2 Zhang Hong-Lang 1 2 Qin Yu-Shan 1 2 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1302-5234Guo Xu-Guang gysygxg@gmail.com 1 2 4 5 1Department of Clinical Laboratory Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510150, China 2Department of Clinical Medicine, The Third Clinical School of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 511436, China 3Department of Clinical Medicine, The Second Clinical School of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 511436, China 4Key Laboratory for Major Obstetric Diseases of Guangdong Province, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510150, China 5Key Laboratory of Reproduction and Genetics of Guangdong Higher Education Institutes, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou 510150, China Academic Editor: Federico Carbone 2020 30 11 2020 2020 543458926 3 2020 13 9 2020 3 11 2020 Copyright © 2020 Xun-Jie Cao et al.2020This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.Background The pathogenesis of invasive aspergillosis (IA) is still unknown, but its progression is rapid and mortality rate remains high. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) galactomannan (GM) analysis has been used to diagnose IA. This study is aimed at making an accurate estimate of the whole accuracy of BALF-GM in diagnosing IA. Methods After a systematic review of the study, a bivariate meta-analysis was used to summarize the specificity (SPE), the sensitivity (SEN), the positive likelihood ratios (PLR), and the negative likelihood ratios (NLR) of BALF-GM in diagnosing IA. The overall test performance was summarized using a layered summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve. Subgroup analysis was performed to explore the heterogeneity between studies. Results A total of 65 studies that are in line with the inclusion criteria were included. The summary estimates of BALF-GM analysis are divided into four categories. The first is the proven+probable vs. possible+no IA, with an SPE, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.85-0.98); SEN, 0.81 (95% CI, 0.76-0.84); PLR, 9.78 (5.78-16.56); and NLR, 0.20 (0.14-0.29). The AUC was 0.94. The BALF-GM test for proven+probable vs. no IA showed SPE, 0.88 (95% CI, 0.87-0.90); SEN, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.78-0.85); PLR, 6.56 (4.93-8.75); and NLR, 0.24 (0.17-0.33). The AUC was 0.93. The BALF-GM test for proven+probable+possible vs. no IA showed SPE, 0.82 (95% CI, 0.79-0.95); SEN, 0.59 (95% CI, 0.55-0.63); PLR, 3.60 (2.07-6.25); and NLR, 0.31 (0.15-0.61). The AUC was 0.86. The analyses for others showed SPE, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.83-0.87); SEN, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.86-0.91); PLR, 6.91 (4.67-10.22); and NLR, 0.18 (0.13-0.26). The AUC was 0.94. Conclusions The findings of this BALF-GM test resulted in some impact on the diagnosis of IA. The BALF-GM assay is considered a method for diagnosing IA with high SEN and SPE. However, the patients' underlying diseases may affect the accuracy of diagnosis. When the cutoff is greater than 1, the sensitivity will be higher. Guangzhou Medical University2019A020 ==== Body 1. Introduction Aspergillus species, as a saprotrophic fungus in soil and decaying vegetation, are widely found throughout the world [1]. Among them, Aspergillus fumigatus is the main cause of invasive aspergillosis [2], which is a severe disseminated fungal disease and causes high morbidity and mortality among severely immunocompromised people [3]. Invasive aspergillosis (IA) occurs not only in patients with long-term neutropenia and with a history of allogeneic hematopoietic cells or solid organ transplants but also in those who use high-dose corticosteroids or genetically severe immune defective patients [4]. The invasive fungal infections in particular are also considered a significant cause of morbidity and death in immunocompromised patients [5]. The culture and microscopy still remain the gold standard for diagnosing IA, but the lack of positive cultures in blood or tissues delays the diagnosis of this infection. This requires invasive procedures, but it is difficult to implement in some cases, such as in critically ill patients or those with thrombocytopenia [5, 6]. Therefore, it is necessary to improve the fatally invasive fungal infections caused by delayed diagnosis, and so rapid processing and reporting are regarded essential. Galactomannan (GM) is a polysaccharide that exists in the Aspergillus cell wall, which proliferates during invasive infections and is subsequently detected in the serum and other bodily fluids [7]. The role of GM might assist in diagnosing IA and has become the focus of clinical research [8]. There have been many studies on the accuracy of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid GM in the diagnosis of IA. Therefore, the 2016 ESCMID-ECMM-ERS guidelines recommended serum and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) GM as markers for diagnosing IA [9]. To date, many studies have assessed the accuracy of the BALF-GM test in diagnosing IA. In 2012, a systematic review of 30 clinical studies evaluated patients with IA using the BALF-GM test and concluded that the optimal threshold for the BALF-GM test was 1.0 when the sensitivity (SEN) is higher [10]. Therefore, a more systematic assessment on the accuracy of the BALF-GM test in diagnosing IA through a meta-analysis was conducted in our study. 2. Methods and Materials 2.1. Research Identification and Selection Two investigators (XJ Cao and YP Li) searched the databases such as EMBASE, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, and Web of Science for interrelated articles published till November 9, 2019. The bibliography of the included studies was also screened. The results were then manually searched for a qualifying test. Studies that were in line with the following criteria were included: (1) provided data of two-by-two tables and (2) full-text publications. The studies were excluded if the following criteria were met: (1) insufficient data, such as meeting summaries, (2) studies with less than 10 patients which were excluded in order to avoid selection bias, (3) meta-analysis and systematic reviews, and (4) animal research. 2.2. Quality Assessment and Data Extraction Two investigators (XJ Cao and YP Li) independently extracted the following information: population, study, diagnostic standard, sample size, and assay characteristics; methodological quality; and data for two-by-two tables and optical density index (ODI). During the evaluation process, if there was a difference between the evaluation results of the two investigators, we shall unify opinions through discussion. A modified quality assessment for diagnostic accuracy study (QUADAS) tool was used to assess the study quality [8]. 2.3. Statistical Analysis To analyze a summary estimate of BALF-GM, a BALF-GM test was constructed to cross-classify into two-by-two tables (proven+probable IA vs. no IA) and two-by-two tables (proven+probable, possible IA vs. no IA). Also, the two-by-two tables (proven+probable IA vs. possible+no IA) and the two-by-two tables (other which included not EORTC/MSG consensus criteria and proven vs. no or colonization and so on) were constructed. Based on the revised EORTC/MSG consensus criteria [11], the patients were divided into four groups according to their IA diagnosis. For studies that reported multiple cutoffs, the cutoff that provided the best performance was used. A binary regression method with 95% confidence interval (CI) was used as the main outcome indicator to assess the overall specificity (SPE) and sensitivity (SEN), and a layered summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was constructed [12]. What is more, the pooled SPE and SEN were also used to calculate negative likelihood ratios (NLR) and positive likelihood ratios (PLR) [12]. The statistically significant heterogeneity was assessed using I2 statistics and explored potential heterogeneity between studies through subgroup analysis. Subgroup analysis was performed for different cutoffs that are 0.5 to 1 and greater than 1. A funnel plot was constructed to visually check for any potential publication bias [13]. The analyses were performed using Stata statistical software package, version 12.0 (StataCorp LP, College Station, U.S.A.) and Meta-DiSc 1.4. 3. Results 3.1. Study Inclusion and Exclusion Criteria and Quality Assessment Of the 896 identified studies, 65 eligible studies were eventually pooled [14–78]. The flow diagram is shown in supplementary materials (Figure S1). The characteristics of the eligible studies are presented in Table 1. Of these 65 eligible studies, 58 were cohort studies and 7 were case-control studies. The bar chart represents the quality assessment according to the improved QUADAS standard (Figure 1). 3.2. Analyses for Proven+Probable vs. No IA The analyses for proven+probable vs. no IA were included in 23 studies, and 21 studies demonstrated a cutoff value of 0.5 to 1.0, and one of the two remaining had a cutoff value of 2.89 and another remained unknown. The SPE and SEN were 0.88 (95% CI, 0.87-0.90) and 0.82 (95% CI, 0.78-0.85), respectively. The NLR and PLR were 0.24 (95% CI, 0.17-0.33) and 6.56 (95% CI, 4.93-8.75), respectively. Diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) was 35.04 (23.75-51.71). The SROC curve is displayed in Figure 2, representing the relationship between SPE and SEN throughout the study. The area under the SROC curve (AUC) was 0.93, which indicated that the BALF-GM assay has a high diagnostic capability. The results of subgroup analyses for “proven or probable vs. no IA” are shown in Table 2, Figure S2, and Figure S3. The sensitivity and specificity demonstrated no significant changes. However, the heterogeneity remained significantly lower. 3.3. Analyses for Proven+Probable vs. Possible+No IA The analyses of proven+probable vs. possible+no IA were included in 15 studies, in which 13 had cutoff values between 0.5 and 1.0, and the remaining two had cutoff values of 2.1 and 3, respectively. The SPE and SEN and associated 95% CIs were 0.87 (0.85-0.98) and 0.81 (0.76-0.84), respectively. The PLR and NLR and associated 95% CIs were 0.20 (0.14-0.29) and 9.78 (5.78-16.56), respectively. DOR was 72.29 (32.27-161.97). In addition to this, all measured I2 values were >50%, and this indicated significant heterogeneity among the indicators of these studies. Figure 2 displays the SROC curves, in which they represent the relationship between SPE and SEN across the studies. The area under the SROC curve was 0.94, which indicated that the BALF-GM has a high diagnostic ability. 3.4. Analyses for Proven+Probable+Possible vs. No IA The analyses of proven+probable+possible vs. no IA were included in 7 studies, in which 6 of them had a threshold of 0.5 and one had a threshold of 1.0. The SPE and SEN and associated 95% CIs were 0.82 (0.79-0.95) and 0.59 (0.55-0.63), respectively. The PLR and NLR were 3.60 (95% CI, 2.07-6.25) and 0.31 (95% CI, 0.15-0.61), respectively. DOR was 14.04 (4.02-49.09). Figure 2 shows the SROC curve, which represents the relationship between SPE and SEN throughout the study. The area under the SROC curve (AUC) was 0.86, which indicated that the resolution of BALF-GM analysis was not very high. 3.5. Analyses for Others The analyses of others were included in 27 studies, in which 12 had cutoff values of 0.5 to 1, 9 had cutoff values that are greater than 1.0, one had a cutoff value of 0.4, and the remaining 4 could not be extracted. The SEN and SPE and associated 95% CIs were 0.89 (0.86-0.91) and 0.85 (0.83-0.87), respectively. The NLR and PLR were 0.18 (95% CI, 0.13-0.26) and 6.91 (95% CI, 4.67-10.22), respectively. DOR was 49.41 (27.46-88.91). Figure 2 displays the SROC curves, and the results showed significant heterogeneity. Funnel plot results revealed no significant publication bias. 3.6. Publication Bias As shown in the funnel plot, the publication bias was not significant in “proven+probable vs. no IA” and “other” groups, with p values of 0.43 and 0.69, respectively. The remaining studies showed significant publication bias. The results are shown in Figure S4. 4. Discussion Invasive fungal infections are particularly a significant cause of morbidity and death in immunocompromised patients [2], and so the diagnosis of IA remains to be crucial. Currently, the invasive procedures mostly rely on histopathological or cytopathological evidences, which are considered the gold standard for diagnosing IA [81]. However, this diagnostic method is rarely used in certain situations, such as in critically ill patients or patients with thrombocytopenia. Due to the difficulty in diagnosing IA, a number of approaches have been developed to overcome this problem. Since 2003, there were several studies that explored the accuracy of the BALF-GM test in diagnosing IA. In 2010, Guo et al. [82] have analyzed cases with proven+probable IA vs. possible+no IA by conducting a meta-analysis, and the results achieved high accuracy of >90% for both SPE and SEN. Compared with the SEN and SPE as summarized in Guo et al.'s research, our study yielded lower SEN 0.81 (0.76-0.84) and SPE 0.87 (0.85-0.89). Four articles we included were different from Guo et al. This may be the reason for the difference. Studies showed that PLR greater than 10 and NLR less than 0.1 provided compelling diagnostic evidence, while the PLR greater than 5 and NLR less than 0.2 also provided a strong diagnostic basis to diagnose, respectively, in most of the cases [83, 84]. Although our analysis results are not so good compared with Guo et al., it still provides a strong basis for diagnosis. Similarly, the study conducted by Zou et al. showed similar results, with a PLR less than 10 but greater than 5 and an NLR of 0.15 [10]. In addition to SPE, SEN, NLR, AUC, and PLR, another test performance DOR was also reported in our study. DOR not only combines the advantages of SPE and SEN but also has superior accuracy as a single indicator [85]. The DOR was 32.27-161.97, which remained high. Based on the abovementioned results, our study also showed high accuracy for possible or no IA cases. In the above four groups, the “proven+probable vs. no IA” group, “proven+probable vs. possible+no IA” group, “proven+probable+possible vs. no IA” group, and “others” group, the “proven or probable vs. no IA” has been implemented in many studies, which may suggest a good clinical significance. In our study, the “proven+probable vs. no IA” group showed the best SEN of 0.88 (0.87-0.90). In contrast, the “proven+probable+possible vs. no IA” group showed the lowest SPE of 0.82 (0.79-0.85), the lowest SPE of 0.82 (0.79-0.85), and the lowest AUC of 0.86. The 2019 EORTC/MSG criteria also indicated that the probable and possible categories are applicable only to immunodeficient patients [86]. In summary, this group was not so rational. Therefore, we do not recommend such grouping for patients without immunodeficiency. However, a study found that the cause of immunosuppression is not related to the EORTC/MSG classification. This study found that the classification according to the definition of EORTC/MSG criteria revealed no significant association with the cause of immunosuppression but showed a trend towards better application in stem cell transplant cases [81]. Further research needs to be done. As shown in Table 2, in the “proven+possible vs. no IA” group, aggregated performance indicators are provided at different thresholds. However, when studies with cutoff values greater than 1 were included, the highest SEN value for BALF-GM was only 0.86. The differences in the results between the whole analysis and the subgroup analysis were mainly due to the number of studies included. When using a threshold range from 0.5 to 1.0, 15 studies were included, but when a threshold range of greater than 1 was used, only 7 studies were included. If a cutoff value of greater than 1 was used in all these studies, false-negative values might be lower or remained the same, resulting in increased or retained SEN value. Therefore, using the cutoff value of greater than 1 will have a better result. One possible cause of heterogeneity is the use of different thresholds in different studies. The cutoff value used in this study was 0.5-1.0, and the heterogeneity was significantly reduced. 5. Conclusions The BALF-GM assay is considered a method for diagnosing IA with high SEN and SPE, and if a cutoff value of greater than 1 was used, false-negative values might be lower or remained the same, resulting in increased or retained SEN value. Therefore, we recommend using the BALF-GM test to diagnose IA. Using the cutoff value of greater than 1 will have a better result. Acknowledgments This study was supported by Guangzhou Medical University (No. 2019A020). Data Availability There are no available data. Conflicts of Interest The authors declare that there are no competing interests associated with the manuscript. Authors' Contributions Xu-Guang Guo conceived and designed the experiments. Xun-Jie Cao, Ya-Ping Li, and Li-Min Xie analyzed the data and made the tables. Hong-Lang Zhang and Yu-Shan Qin contributed to the production of figures by the analysis tools. Xun-Jie Cao, Ya-Ping Li, and Li-Min Xie participated in the writing, reading, and revising of the manuscript and approved the final version of the manuscript. Xun-Jie Cao and Ya-Ping Li contributed equally to this work. Supplementary Materials Supplementary Materials Figure S1: flow diagram of inclusion and exclusion studies. Figure S2: subgroup analysis for proven+probable vs. no (sensitivity). Figure S3: subgroup analysis for proven+probable vs. no (specificity). Figure S4: funnel plot that can reveal the publication bias of these four groups. Click here for additional data file. Figure 1 Overall quality assessment of all 65 included studies. Data are presented as stacked bars for each quality item, including modified quality assessment for studies of diagnostic accuracy (QUADAS) criteria. Figure 2 SROC curves from the bivariate model for (a) proven+probable vs. no IA, (b) proven+probable vs. possible+no IA, (c) proven+probable+possible vs. no IA, and (d) other, respectively. The smaller region (confidence contour) contains likely combinations of the mean value of sensitivity and specificity. The wider region (prediction contour) demonstrates more uncertainty as to where the likely values of sensitivity and specificity might occur for individual studies. SROC = summary receiver operating characteristic. Table 1 Characteristics of 65 studies included in the meta-analysis of diagnosis of IA using BALF-GM. Study Diagnostic standard Best cutoffs Sample size Study design Patient population Mean age Male (%) Sehgal 2019 EORTC/MSG criteria 2.5 127 Case control Adults with MTHF 45.2 56.5 Liu 2019 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.85 190 Cohort Adults with MTHF NA NA Jenks 2019 (1) EORTC/MSG criteria; (2) a slightly modified version of the clinical algorithm described by Blot and colleagues 1 82 Cohort Nonneutropenic adults NA 39.0 Rozaliyani 2019 EORTC/MSG criteria 2 155 Cohort Adults with MTHF NA NA Yu 2019 EORTC/MSG criteria 2.94 184 Cohort Nonneutropenic people NA 0.4 Bellanger 2018 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 597 Cohort Adults with MTHF NA NA Imbert 2018 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 32 Cohort Adults with MTHF 59.0 65.7 Hoenigl 2018 EORTC/MSG criteria NA 28 Cohort Adults with MTHF 60.0 28.6 Castillo 2018 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 106 Cohort Adults with MTHF 55.3 65.1 Deng 2018 EORTC/MSG criteria 1.5 172 Cohort Adults with MTHF NA 70.2 Gupta 2017 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 71 Case control Adults with HM 38.6 54.8 Eigl 2017 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 53 Cohort Adults with MTHF 58.0 32.1 Taghizadeh 2017 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 116 Cohort Adults with MTHF 46.0 62.9 Zhuang 2017 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.76 183 Cohort Nonneutropenic adults NA 55.7 Zhou 2017 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.7 120 Cohort Nonneutropenic people NA 53.3 Boch 2017 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 44 Cohort Adults with MTHF NA 52.3 Zhang 2016 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 94 Cohort Adults with MTHF NA NA Boch 2016 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 34 Cohort Adults with MTHF Proven/probable: 57; no IPA: 63 53.0 Fortun 2016 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 44 Cohort Adults with ISC/COPD NA 64.4 Lahmer 2016 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 49 Cohort Adults with MTHF 59.0 57.0 Lin 2016 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 96 Cohort Adults with MTHF 64.0 64.8 Ozger 2015 EORTC/MSG criteria NA 44 Cohort Nonneutropenic adults NA 70.5 Khodavaisy 2015 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 43 Cohort Adults with MTHF 56.5 58.8 Mohammadi 2015 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 70 Case control Children with MTHF 8.4 62.5 Zhang 2015 EORTC/MSG criteria 1.19 121 Cohort Adults with MTHF 59.3 51.2 Willinger 2014 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 47 Cohort Patients with TR 50.6 63.6 Heng 2014 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.8 116 Cohort Adults with HM Proven/probable: 54; no IFD: 59 71.7 Affolter 2014 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 569 Cohort Adults with IC/respiratory symptoms 54.0 66.6 Prattes 2014 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 221 Cohort Adults with respiratory disease NA 58.0 Hoenigl 2014 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 78 Case control Adults with MTHF 58.0 67.0 Rose 2014 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 119 Cohort Adults with MTHF NA 54.5 de Mol 2013 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 41 Cohort Children with MTHF 9.8 57.4 Kono 2013 NA 0.5 45 Cohort Adults with MTHF NA NA Zhang 2013 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 91 Cohort Adults with COPD 64.2 80.2 Brownback 2013 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 143 Cohort Adults with IC 50.4 75.0 Zhao 2013 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 112 Cohort Patients with MTHF NA NA Hadrich 2012 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 70 Case control Patients with HM 37.6 0.7 Izumikawa 2012 Proposed enrollment criteria for prospective clinical studies of CPA by Denning were also employed, with minor modifications, in this investigation [79] 0.4 144 Cohort Adults with MTHF 64.8 61.8 Reinwald 2012 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 87 Cohort Patients with HM NA 0.7 Tabarsi 2012 Infectious Diseases Society of America guidelines 0.5 17 Cohort Patients with TR 34.6 NA D'Haese 2012 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.8 251 Case control Patients with MTHF NA 58.2 He 2012 Based on the case definition proposed by Bulpa et al. [80] 0.8 34 Cohort Patients with COPD NA NA Bhella 2012 EORTC/MSG criteria NA 46 Cohort Patients with HM NA NA Zhang 2011 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 76 Cohort Elderly patients with lung diseases NA NA Racil 2011 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 255 Cohort Adults with HM 54.0 65.7 Torelli 2011 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 158 Cohort Patients with MTHF NA NA Acosta 2011 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 52 Cohort Adults with MTHF 57.5 60.0 Luong 2011 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 150 Cohort Patients with TR 58.4 51.3 Bergeron 2010 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 101 Cohort Adults with HM 45.0 62.4 Hsu 2010 EORTC/MSG criteria 1.1 62 Case control Patients with hematology NA 72.6 Pasqualotto 2010 EORTC/MSG criteria 1.5 60 Cohort Patients with TR 55.0 51.7 Park 2010 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 359 Cohort Adults with MTHF 57.8 62.1 Luong 2010 EORTC/MSG criteria 3 145 Cohort Adults with MTHF 55.0 65.0 Sarrafzadeh 2010 EORTC/MSG criteria 1.5 49 Cohort Adults with MTHF NA 63.3∗ Desai 2009 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.98 85 Cohort Children with HM/IC 10.3 45.0 Fréalle 2009 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 64 Cohort Adults with HM 49.2 71.9 Kimura 2009 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5–1.3 26 Cohort Adults with HM 70.0 80.4 Maertens 2009 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 99 Cohort Adults with HM 53.6 NA Shahid 2008 EORTC/MSG criteria NA 59 Cohort Adults with BC 58.0 91.3 Meersseman 2008 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 110 Cohort Adults with MTHF 60.0 67.3 Clancy 2007 EORTC/MSG criteria 2.1 81 Cohort Patients with TR 54.0 74.1 Husain 2007 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 117 Cohort Adults with TR 52.3 44.0 Musher 2004 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 99 Cohort Patients with allogeneic HSCT Cases: 45.2; controls: 41.2 NA Becker 2003 EORTC/MSG criteria 1 27 Cohort Hematology patients NA NA Danpornprasert 2010 EORTC/MSG criteria 0.5 30 Cohort Patients with MTHF 41.0 56.7 EORTC/MSG = European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Mycoses Study Group; BALF-GM = BALF-galactomannan; IA = invasive aspergillosis; MTHF = multiple host factors; HM = hematologic malignancy; IC = immunocompromised; TR = transplant recipients; ISC = immunosuppressive conditions; COPD = chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; BC = bronchogenic carcinoma; ∗mean value in proven+probable+possible patients. Table 2 Pooled sensitivity and specificity of the included studies for proven or probable vs. no IA. Study Pooled SEN (95% CI) Pooled SPE (95% CI) Cutoff of 0.5-1.0 0.80 (0.75-0.84) 0.88 (0.87-0.90) Cutoff of greater than 1.0 0.84 (0.79-0.89) 0.88 (0.85-0.90) SEN = sensitivity; SPE = specificity. ==== Refs 1 Garcia-Rubio R. Cuenca-Estrella M. Mellado E. Triazole resistance in Aspergillus species: an emerging problem Drugs 2017 77 6 599 613 10.1007/s40265-017-0714-4 2-s2.0-85013770177 28236169 2 Kwon-Chung K. J. Sugui J. A. Aspergillus fumigatus--what makes the species a ubiquitous human fungal pathogen? PLoS Pathogens 2013 9 12, article e1003743 10.1371/journal.ppat.1003743 2-s2.0-84892836801 24348239 3 Morgand M. Rammaert B. Poirée S. Chronic invasive Aspergillus sinusitis and otitis with meningeal extension successfully treated with voriconazole Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy 2015 59 12 7857 7861 10.1128/AAC.01506-15 2-s2.0-84954530653 26392507 4 Miceli M. H. Kauffman C. A. Aspergillus galactomannan for diagnosing invasive aspergillosis JAMA 2017 318 12 1175 1176 10.1001/jama.2017.10661 2-s2.0-85029949178 28973595 5 Patterson T. F. Donnelly J. P. New concepts in diagnostics for invasive mycoses: non-culture-based methodologies Journal of Fungi 2019 5 1 p. 9 10.3390/jof5010009 2-s2.0-85061662823 30658509 6 Schelenz S. Barnes R. A. Barton R. C. British Society for Medical Mycology best practice recommendations for the diagnosis of serious fungal diseases The Lancet Infectious Diseases 2015 15 4 461 474 10.1016/S1473-3099(15)70006-X 2-s2.0-84925378425 25771341 7 Ullmann A. J. Aguado J. M. Arikan-Akdagli S. Diagnosis and management of Aspergillus diseases: executive summary of the 2017 ESCMID-ECMM-ERS guideline Clinical microbiology and infection: the official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases 2018 24 Suppl 1 e1 e38 10.1016/j.cmi.2018.01.002 2-s2.0-85043449929 29544767 8 de Heer K. Gerritsen M. G. Visser C. E. Leeflang M. M. G. Galactomannan detection in broncho-alveolar lavage fluid for invasive aspergillosis in immunocompromised patients The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2019 5 5, article CD012399 10.1002/14651858.cd012399.pub2 2-s2.0-85066858655 9 Patterson T. F. Thompson G. R. III Denning D. W. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of aspergillosis: 2016 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America Clinical infectious diseases: an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2016 63 4 e1 e60 10.1093/cid/ciw326 2-s2.0-84982111765 27365388 10 Zou M. Tang L. Zhao S. Systematic review and meta-analysis of detecting galactomannan in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for diagnosing invasive aspergillosis PLoS One 2012 7 8, article e43347 10.1371/journal.pone.0043347 2-s2.0-84865050415 22905261 11 De Pauw B. Walsh T. J. Donnelly J. P. Revised definitions of invasive fungal disease from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Invasive Fungal Infections Cooperative Group and the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Mycoses Study Group (EORTC/MSG) Consensus Group Clinical Infectious Diseases 2008 46 12 1813 1821 10.1086/588660 2-s2.0-46249126149 18462102 12 Guo Y. L. Chen Y. Q. Wang K. Qin S. M. Wu C. Kong J. L. Accuracy of BAL galactomannan in diagnosing invasive aspergillosis: a bivariate metaanalysis and systematic review Chest 2010 138 4 817 824 10.1378/chest.10-0488 2-s2.0-77957828768 20453070 13 Deeks J. J. Macaskill P. Irwig L. The performance of tests of publication bias and other sample size effects in systematic reviews of diagnostic test accuracy was assessed Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2005 58 9 882 893 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.01.016 2-s2.0-23644432857 16085191 14 Liu L. Li J. Dong H. Diagnostic value of the combinations of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid galactomannan test and serum galactomannan test in invasive pulmonary aspergillosis Zhonghua wei zhong bing ji jiu yi xue 2019 31 3 331 335 10.3760/cma.j.issn.2095-4352.2019.03.014 2-s2.0-85063668641 30914095 15 Jenks J. D. Mehta S. R. Taplitz R. Aslam S. Reed S. L. Hoenigl M. Point-of-care diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in non-neutropenic patients: Aspergillus galactomannan lateral flow assay versus Aspergillus-specific lateral flow device test in bronchoalveolar lavage Mycoses 2019 62 3 230 236 10.1111/myc.12881 2-s2.0-85059933689 30565352 16 Rozaliyani A. Sedono R. Jusuf A. A novel diagnosis scoring model to predict invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in the intensive care unit Saudi Medical Journal 2019 40 2 140 146 10.15537/smj.2019.2.22940 2-s2.0-85061112313 30723858 17 Yu Y. Zhu C. Shen H. Galactomannan detection in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid corrected by urea dilution for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis among nonneutropenic patients Journal of Thoracic Disease 2019 11 2 465 476 10.21037/jtd.2019.01.07 2-s2.0-85070455071 30962990 18 Sehgal I. S. Dhooria S. Choudhary H. Efficiency of A fumigatus-specific IgG and galactomannan testing in the diagnosis of simple aspergilloma Mycoses 2019 62 12 1108 1115 10.1111/myc.12987 2-s2.0-85073926337 31408547 19 Bellanger A.-P. Gbaguidi-Haore H. Tatoyan N. Berceanu A. Scherer E. Millon L. Local retrospective analysis of galactomannan cut-off values in bronchoalveolar lavage fluids for diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis Folia Microbiologica 2018 63 6 757 761 10.1007/s12223-018-0618-z 2-s2.0-85047809477 29846912 20 Imbert S. Meyer I. Palous M. Aspergillus PCR in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for the diagnosis and prognosis of aspergillosis in patients with hematological and non-hematological conditions Frontiers in Microbiology 2018 9 10.3389/fmicb.2018.01877 2-s2.0-85051539899 21 Hoenigl M. Eigl S. Heldt S. Duettmann W. Thornton C. Prattes J. Clinical evaluation of the newly formatted lateral-flow device for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis Mycoses 2018 61 1 40 43 10.1111/myc.12704 2-s2.0-85031321992 28922489 22 Castillo C. G. Kauffman C. A. Zhai J. Jiang H. Agozino S. M. Miceli M. H. Testing the performance of a prototype lateral flow device using bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in high-risk patients Mycoses 2018 61 1 4 10 10.1111/myc.12694 2-s2.0-85037721062 28905439 23 Deng J. Wu S. Y. Liu Y. Galactomannan tests of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for diagnosing invasive pulmonary aspergillosis Sichuan da xue xue bao. Yi Xue Ban Journal of Sichuan University. Medical science edition 2018 49 1 124 128 29737102 24 Gupta A. Capoor M. R. Shende T. Comparative evaluation of galactomannan test with bronchoalveolar lavage and serum for the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in patients with hematological malignancies Journal of laboratory physicians 2017 9 4 234 238 10.4103/JLP.JLP_127_16 28966482 25 Eigl S. Hoenigl M. Spiess B. Galactomannan testing and Aspergillus PCR in same-day bronchoalveolar lavage and blood samples for diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis Medical Mycology 2017 55 5 528 534 10.1093/mmy/myw102 2-s2.0-85026865001 27744310 26 Taghizadeh-Armaki M. Hedayati M. T. Moqarabzadeh V. Effect of involved Aspergillus species on galactomannan in bronchoalveolar lavage of patients with invasive aspergillosis Journal of Medical Microbiology 2017 66 7 898 904 10.1099/jmm.0.000512 2-s2.0-85026677785 28693685 27 Zhuang Q. Ma H. Zhang Y. Galactomannan in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis with nonneutropenic patients Canadian Respiratory Journal 2017 2017 7 3685261 10.1155/2017/3685261 2-s2.0-85042197512 29259396 28 Zhou W. Li H. Zhang Y. Diagnostic value of galactomannan antigen test in serum and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples from patients with nonneutropenic invasive pulmonary aspergillosis Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2017 55 7 2153 2161 10.1128/JCM.00345-17 2-s2.0-85021258548 28446576 29 Boch T. Reinwald M. Spiess B. Diagnostics of pulmonary aspergillosis in critically ill hematological and non-hematological patients in the intensive care unit by combined use of galactomannan, 1-3-beta-D-glucan, aspergillus specific PCR and conventional culture in concurrent blood and bronchoalveolar lavage samples - results of a multicenter prospective pilot study Blood 2017 130 30 Lin P. C. Lai Q. Q. Zhou Y. The diagnostic performance of galactomannan detection for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in non-neutropenic hosts Zhonghua jie he he hu xi za zhi = Zhonghua jiehe he huxi zazhi = Chinese journal of tuberculosis and respiratory diseases 2016 39 12 929 933 27938542 31 Zhang S. Wang S. Wan Z. Que C. Li R. Yu J. Quantitative real-time PCR and Platelia galactomannan assay for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis: bronchoalveolar lavage fluid performs better than serum in non-neutropaenic patients Mycopathologia 2016 181 9-10 625 629 10.1007/s11046-016-0024-5 2-s2.0-84976319599 27270570 32 Boch T. Buchheidt D. Spiess B. Miethke T. Hofmann W. K. Reinwald M. Direct comparison of galactomannan performance in concurrent serum and bronchoalveolar lavage samples in immunocompromised patients at risk for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis Mycoses 2016 59 2 80 85 10.1111/myc.12434 2-s2.0-84953888894 26627577 33 Fortún J. Martín-Dávila P. de la Pedrosa E. G. G. Galactomannan in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in non-hematological patients Journal of Infection 2016 72 6 738 744 10.1016/j.jinf.2016.02.019 2-s2.0-84964329762 27025205 34 Lahmer T. Neuenhahn M. Held J. Rasch S. Schmid R. M. Huber W. Comparison of 1,3-β - d -glucan with galactomannan in serum and bronchoalveolar fluid for the detection of Aspergillus species in immunosuppressed mechanical ventilated critically ill patients Journal of Critical Care 2016 36 259 264 10.1016/j.jcrc.2016.06.026 2-s2.0-84994761037 27475024 35 Khodavaisy S. Hedayati M. T. Alialy M. Habibi M. R. Badali H. Detection of galactomannan in bronchoalveolar lavage of the intensive care unit patients at risk for invasive aspergillosis Current Medical Mycology 2015 1 1 12 17 10.18869/acadpub.cmm.1.1.12 28680975 36 Mohammadi S. Khalilzadeh S. Goudarzipour K. Bronchoalveolar galactomannan in invasive pulmonary aspergillosis: a prospective study in pediatric patients Medical Mycology 2015 53 7 709 716 10.1093/mmy/myv053 2-s2.0-84941209691 26229150 37 Özger S. Hizel K. Kalkanci A. Evaluation of risk factors for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis and detection of diagnostic values of galactomannan and PCR methods in bronchoalveolar lavage samples from non-neutropenic intensive care unit patients Mikrobiyoloji Bülteni 2015 49 4 565 575 10.5578/mb.9906 26649414 38 Zhang S. Wang S. Wan Z. Li R. Yu J. The diagnosis of invasive and noninvasive pulmonary aspergillosis by serum and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid galactomannan assay BioMed Research International 2015 2015 5 943691 10.1155/2015/943691 2-s2.0-84922342789 25685819 39 Willinger B. Lackner M. Lass-Flörl C. Bronchoalveolar lavage lateral-flow device test for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in solid organ transplant patients: a semiprospective multicenter study Transplantation 2014 98 8 898 902 10.1097/TP.0000000000000153 2-s2.0-84922069623 24879383 40 Heng S. C. Chen S. C. A. Morrissey C. O. Clinical utility of Aspergillus galactomannan and PCR in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with haematological malignancies Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease 2014 79 3 322 327 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2014.03.020 2-s2.0-84902120398 24768294 41 Affolter K. Tamm M. Jahn K. Galactomannan in bronchoalveolar lavage for diagnosing invasive fungal disease American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2014 190 3 309 317 10.1164/rccm.201403-0431OC 2-s2.0-84907297612 25007380 42 Prattes J. Flick H. Prüller F. Novel tests for diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in patients with underlying respiratory diseases American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2014 190 8 922 929 10.1164/rccm.201407-1275OC 2-s2.0-84918555101 25203869 43 Hoenigl M. Prattes J. Spiess B. Performance of galactomannan, beta-d-glucan, Aspergillus lateral-flow device, conventional culture, and PCR tests with bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2014 52 6 2039 2045 10.1128/JCM.00467-14 2-s2.0-84901652680 24671798 44 Rose S. R. Vallabhajosyula S. Velez M. G. The utility of bronchoalveolar lavage beta-D-glucan testing for the diagnosis of invasive fungal infections The Journal of Infection 2014 69 3 278 283 10.1016/j.jinf.2014.04.008 2-s2.0-84922399139 24797077 45 de Mol M. de Jongste J. C. van Westreenen M. Diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in children with bronchoalveolar lavage galactomannan Pediatric Pulmonology 2013 48 8 789 796 10.1002/ppul.22670 2-s2.0-84881390087 22949309 46 Zhao Y. Stensvold C. R. Perlin D. S. Arendrup M. C. Azole resistance in Aspergillus fumigatus from bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples of patients with chronic diseases The Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy 2013 68 7 1497 1504 10.1093/jac/dkt071 2-s2.0-84879479980 23463213 47 Zhang X.-B. Chen G.-P. Lin Q.-C. Lin X. Zhang H.-Y. Wang J.-H. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid galactomannan detection for diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease Medical Mycology 2013 51 7 688 695 10.3109/13693786.2013.777162 2-s2.0-84884328961 23527739 48 Kono Y. Tsushima K. Yamaguchi K. The utility of galactomannan antigen in the bronchial washing and serum for diagnosing pulmonary aspergillosis Respiratory Medicine 2013 107 7 1094 1100 10.1016/j.rmed.2013.04.007 2-s2.0-84878901989 23632100 49 Brownback K. R. Pitts L. R. Simpson S. Q. Utility of galactomannan antigen detection in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid in immunocompromised patients Mycoses 2013 56 5 552 558 10.1111/myc.12074 2-s2.0-84881029833 23496321 50 Izumikawa K. Yamamoto Y. Mihara T. Bronchoalveolar lavage galactomannan for the diagnosis of chronic pulmonary aspergillosis Medical Mycology 2012 50 8 811 817 10.3109/13693786.2012.682228 2-s2.0-84867497611 22568603 51 Reinwald M. Spiess B. Heinz W. J. Diagnosing pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with hematological malignancies: a multicenter prospective evaluation of an Aspergillus PCR assay and a galactomannan ELISA in bronchoalveolar lavage samples European Journal of Haematology 2012 89 2 120 127 10.1111/j.1600-0609.2012.01806.x 2-s2.0-84863835368 22650156 52 Tabarsi P. Soraghi A. Marjani M. Comparison of serum and bronchoalveolar lavage galactomannan in diagnosing invasive aspergillosis in solid-organ transplant recipients Experimental and Clinical Transplantation 2012 10 3 278 281 10.6002/ect.2011.0176 2-s2.0-84862619477 22631066 53 He H. Ding L. Sun B. Li F. Zhan Q. Role of galactomannan determinations in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples from critically ill patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis: a prospective study Critical Care 2012 16 4 p. R138 10.1186/cc11443 2-s2.0-84864205475 22835335 54 D'Haese J. Theunissen K. Vermeulen E. Detection of galactomannan in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples of patients at risk for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis: analytical and clinical validity Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2012 50 4 1258 1263 10.1128/JCM.06423-11 2-s2.0-84858602013 22301025 55 Bhella S. Paul N. Husain S. Brandwein J. M. Comparison of sensitivity of low-dose CT scan and serum galactomannan in patients with hematologic malignancies and positive bronchoalveolar lavage for invasive pulmonary Aspergillosis Blood 2012 120 21 p. 1490 10.1182/blood.V120.21.1490.1490 56 Racil Z. Kocmanova I. Toskova M. Galactomannan detection in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in patients with hematological diseases-the role of factors affecting assay performance International Journal of Infectious Diseases 2011 15 12 E874 E881 10.1016/j.ijid.2011.09.011 2-s2.0-82455187908 22040924 57 Torelli R. Sanguinetti M. Moody A. Diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis by a commercial real-time PCR assay for Aspergillus DNA in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid samples from high-risk patients compared to a galactomannan enzyme immunoassay Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2011 49 12 4273 4278 10.1128/JCM.05026-11 2-s2.0-82455220443 22012015 58 Zhang X.-B. Lin Q.-C. Lin X. Galactomannan detection in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid facilitates the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in elderly patients with lung diseases Respirology 2011 162 SI 56 56 59 Acosta J. Catalan M. del Palacio-Peréz-Medel A. A prospective comparison of galactomannan in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for the diagnosis of pulmonary invasive aspergillosis in medical patients under intensive care: comparison with the diagnostic performance of galactomannan and of (1→ 3)-β -d-glucan chromogenic assay in serum samples Clinical Microbiology and Infection 2011 17 7 1053 1060 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2010.03357.x 2-s2.0-79959955296 20825441 60 Hadrich I. Mary C. Makni F. Comparison of PCR-ELISA and real-time PCR for invasive aspergillosis diagnosis in patients with hematological malignancies Medical Mycology 2011 49 5 489 494 10.3109/13693786.2010.540724 2-s2.0-79959188209 21108574 61 Luong M.-L. Clancy C. J. Vadnerkar A. Comparison of an Aspergillus real-time polymerase chain reaction assay with galactomannan testing of bronchoalvelolar lavage fluid for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in lung transplant recipients Clinical Infectious Diseases 2011 52 10 1218 1226 10.1093/cid/cir185 2-s2.0-79955397135 21507918 62 Bergeron A. Belle A. Sulahian A. Contribution of galactomannan antigen detection in BAL to the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with hematologic malignancies Chest 2010 137 2 410 415 10.1378/chest.09-0701 2-s2.0-76749136205 19801584 63 Hsu L.-Y. Ding Y. Phua J. Galactomannan testing of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid is useful for diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in hematology patients BMC Infectious Diseases 2010 10 1 10.1186/1471-2334-10-44 2-s2.0-77952296360 64 Pasqualotto A. C. Xavier M. O. Sánchez L. B. Diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in lung transplant recipients by detection of galactomannan in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid Transplantation 2010 90 3 306 311 10.1097/TP.0b013e3181e49bc1 2-s2.0-77955415296 20548265 65 Park S. Y. Lee S. O. Choi S. H. Aspergillus galactomannan antigen assay in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis Journal of Infection 2010 61 6 492 498 10.1016/j.jinf.2010.08.014 2-s2.0-78649634322 20833201 66 Luong M.-L. Filion C. Labbé A.-C. Clinical utility and prognostic value of bronchoalveolar lavage galactomannan in patients with hematologic malignancies Diagnostic Microbiology and Infectious Disease 2010 68 2 132 139 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2010.03.017 2-s2.0-77956567067 20846585 67 Sarrafzadeh S. A. Hoseinpoor R. A. Ardalan M. Mansouri D. Tabarsi P. Pourpak Z. The accuracy of serum galactomannan assay in diagnosing invasive pulmonary aspergillosis Iranian Journal of Allergy Asthma and Immunology 2010 9 3 149 155 68 Danpornprasert P. Foongladda S. Tscheikuna J. Impact of bronchoalveolar lavage galactomannan on the outcome of patients at risk for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis Journal of the Medical Association of Thailand = Chotmaihet thangphaet 2010 93 Suppl 1 S86 S93 20364562 69 Maertens J. Maertens V. Theunissen K. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid galactomannan for the diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with hematologic diseases Clinical infectious diseases: an official publication of the Infectious Diseases Society of America 2009 49 11 1688 1693 10.1086/647935 2-s2.0-72849119779 19886801 70 Desai R. Ross L. A. Hoffman J. A. The role of bronchoalveolar lavage galactomannan in the diagnosis of pediatric invasive aspergillosis The Pediatric Infectious Disease Journal 2009 28 4 283 286 10.1097/INF.0b013e31818f0934 2-s2.0-65649087512 19238113 71 Fréalle E. Decrucq K. Botterel F. Diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis using bronchoalveolar lavage in haematology patients: influence of bronchoalveolar lavage human DNA content on real-time PCR performance European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases: official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology 2009 28 3 223 232 10.1007/s10096-008-0616-1 2-s2.0-61349094675 18763000 72 Kimura S. Odawara J. Aoki T. Yamakura M. Takeuchi M. Matsue K. Detection of sputum Aspergillus galactomannan for diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in haematological patients International Journal of Hematology 2009 90 4 463 470 10.1007/s12185-009-0429-8 2-s2.0-73449138722 19838867 73 Shahid M. Malik A. Bhargava R. Bronchogenic carcinoma and secondary aspergillosis--common yet unexplored: evaluation of the role of bronchoalveolar lavage-polymerase chain reaction and some nonvalidated serologic methods to establish early diagnosis Cancer 2008 113 3 547 558 10.1002/cncr.23570 2-s2.0-49049121610 18521930 74 Meersseman W. Lagrou K. Maertens J. Galactomannan in bronchoalveolar lavage fluid: a tool for diagnosing aspergillosis in intensive care unit patients American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2008 177 1 27 34 10.1164/rccm.200704-606OC 2-s2.0-37849036016 17885264 75 Clancy C. J. Jaber R. A. Leather H. L. Bronchoalveolar lavage galactomannan in diagnosis of invasive pulmonary aspergillosis among solid-organ transplant recipients Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2007 45 6 1759 1765 10.1128/JCM.00077-07 2-s2.0-34250676905 17428933 76 Husain S. Paterson D. L. Studer S. M. Aspergillus galactomannan antigen in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid for the diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis in lung transplant recipients Transplantation 2007 83 10 1330 1336 10.1097/01.tp.0000263992.41003.33 2-s2.0-34249003295 17519782 77 Musher B. Fredricks D. Leisenring W. Balajee S. A. Smith C. Marr K. A. Aspergillus galactomannan enzyme immunoassay and quantitative PCR for diagnosis of invasive aspergillosis with bronchoalveolar lavage fluid Journal of Clinical Microbiology 2004 42 12 5517 5522 10.1128/JCM.42.12.5517-5522.2004 2-s2.0-10844247032 15583275 78 Becker M. J. Lugtenburg E. J. Cornelissen J. J. van der Schee C. Hoogsteden H. C. de Marie S. Galactomannan detection in computerized tomography-based broncho-alveolar lavage fluid and serum in haematological patients at risk for invasive pulmonary aspergillosis British Journal of Haematology 2003 121 3 448 457 10.1046/j.1365-2141.2003.04308.x 2-s2.0-0038692339 12716367 79 Denning D. W. Riniotis K. Dobrashian R. Sambatakou H. Chronic cavitary and fibrosing pulmonary and pleural aspergillosis: case series, proposed nomenclature change, and review Clinical Infectious Diseases 2003 37 Suppl. 3 S265 S280 10.1086/376526 2-s2.0-0141887305 12975754 80 Bulpa P. Dive A. Sibille Y. Invasive pulmonary aspergillosis in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease The European Respiratory Journal 2007 30 4 782 800 10.1183/09031936.00062206 2-s2.0-37849001095 17906086 81 Rieger H. Lustig D. Barlow S. Applicability of the EORTC/MSG criteria for IFD in clinical practice Annals of Hematology 2015 94 5 847 855 10.1007/s00277-014-2282-y 2-s2.0-84930346981 25544029 82 Guo Y. L. Chen Y. Q. Wang K. Qin S. M. Wu C. Kong J. L. Accuracy of BAL galactomannan in diagnosing invasive aspergillosis Chest 2010 138 4 817 824 10.1378/chest.10-0488 2-s2.0-77957828768 20453070 83 Deeks J. J. Systematic reviews in health care: systematic reviews of evaluations of diagnostic and screening tests BMJ 2001 323 7305 157 162 10.1136/bmj.323.7305.157 2-s2.0-85008285263 11463691 84 Drummond M. F. Users’ Guides to the Medical Literature JAMA 1997 277 19 1552 1557 10.1001/jama.1997.03540430064035 9153371 85 Glas A. S. Lijmer J. G. Prins M. H. Bonsel G. J. Bossuyt P. M. M. The diagnostic odds ratio: a single indicator of test performance Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 2003 56 11 1129 1135 10.1016/S0895-4356(03)00177-X 2-s2.0-0242629046 14615004 86 Donnelly J. P. Revision and update of the consensus definitions of invasive fungal disease from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer and the Mycoses Study Group Education and Research Consortium Clinical Infectious Diseases 2019 71 6 1367 1376