Evidence Hub

Late-onset fungal infection of the bronchial stump post-lung resection: a report of two rare cases of Aspergillus flavus and mixed Candida/Cryptococcus coinfection diagnosed via metagenomic next-generation sequencing

Zhu W, Li Y, Xu Q, Lin D, Zhou T, Yang F, Shi M

AME case reports, 2026

Abstract

Background: Fungal infection of the bronchial stump is rare, characterized by insidious clinical manifestations and often misdiagnosed as bacterial infection or tumor recurrence. Most reported cases involve Aspergillus fumigatus, with Aspergillus flavus encountered far less frequently. Importantly, fungal colonization of the bronchial stump by Cryptococcus species has not been previously documented, nor has a mixed infection involving Cryptococcus and other fungi at this site. These rare presentations highlight diagnostic blind spots in postoperative airway management and underscore the need for heightened clinical awareness.

Case description: Case 1: A 53-year-old man underwent left upper lobectomy for adenocarcinoma four years prior. In 2024, he presented with hoarseness and chest tightness. Positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) revealed a metabolically active soft-tissue nodule adjacent to the surgical suture line. Bronchoscopic biopsy combined with metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) confirmed the diagnosis of bronchial stump aspergillosis (BSA). The patient received posaconazole therapy for 7 months. Case 2: A 77-year-old woman underwent right lower lobectomy for adenocarcinoma six years earlier. In 2025, she developed cough with sputum production. CT demonstrated bilateral pneumonia with focal consolidation/atelectasis and bilateral pleural effusions. Bronchoscopy and mNGS identified a mixed infection with Candida albicans and Cryptococcus…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free