Evidence Hub

Analysis of clinical and imaging features and prognosis of patients positive for Tropheryma whipplei detected by nanopore sequencing of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid

Song C, Zhao CY, Yu M, Jiang CY, Qiang HB, Liu RH, Yang XM, Xie ZH et al.

Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2025

14 participants

Abstract

Background: To probe into the application value of nanopore sequencing in patients suffering from positive Tropheryma whipplei (TW), analyze their clinical features, imaging manifestations, and treatment prognosis, and provide new evidence for the diagnosis and treatment of Whipple's disease.

Methods: This study retrospectively analyzed 2,137 samples subjected to nanopore sequencing at the Fourth People's Hospital of Nanning. Among them, 14 bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) samples were positive for TW. Patients were divided into a high-sequence group (100) and a low-sequence group (≤100) in accordance with the TW sequence counts. The clinical features, laboratory indicators, imaging manifestations, and treatment prognosis of these two groups were compared and analyzed in an all-round manner.

Results: The levels of C-reactive protein (CRP) and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) in the high-sequence group were strikingly higher than those in the low-sequence group (P < 0.05). Radiologically, TW pneumonia mostly presented as patchy shadows, ground-glass opacities, and bronchiectasis, which highly overlapped with the imaging features of tuberculosis or interstitial pneumonia. With respect to treatment, 85.7% of the 14 patients exhibited symptomatic improvement subsequent to antibiotic treatment. Fluoroquinolones and combination therapy regimens demonstrated satisfactory efficacy, but patients suffering from severe conditions or advanced age may require an extended treatment course.…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 14 participants or records.

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