2005
DOI: 10.1016/j.healun.2004.04.019
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The Utility of Cytopathology Testing in Lung Transplant Recipients

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
3
3

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 17 publications
(16 reference statements)
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Although commonly requested in routine lung recipient care, the value of sending BAL cytology with pathology examination as a routine study has been questioned, particularly in light of the relative cost. 43 , 44 Prior studies examining the diagnostic performance of BAL cytology for infection have yielded conflicting results. Al Zaabi et al 43 demonstrated a poor detection rate for infectious agents utilizing cytology.…”
Section: Statementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Although commonly requested in routine lung recipient care, the value of sending BAL cytology with pathology examination as a routine study has been questioned, particularly in light of the relative cost. 43 , 44 Prior studies examining the diagnostic performance of BAL cytology for infection have yielded conflicting results. Al Zaabi et al 43 demonstrated a poor detection rate for infectious agents utilizing cytology.…”
Section: Statementsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Nonetheless, studies have suggested a low diagnostic yield for BAL cytology. A study of 366 bronchoscopies on 65 subjects found only two unique and clinically significant diagnoses 4 . Similarly, a study of 10 lung transplant recipients identified Candida sp .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A study of 366 bronchoscopies on 65 subjects found only two unique and clinically significant diagnoses. 4 Similarly, a study of 10 lung transplant recipients identified Candida sp. as the major diagnostic yield, for which there is uncertain clinical significance.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%