Evidence Hub

Invasive Fusarium solani infection diagnosed by traditional microbial detection methods and metagenomic next-generation sequencing in a pediatric patient: a case report and literature review

Ling J, Liang L, Liu X, Wu W, Yan Z, Zhou W, Jiang Y, Kuang L

Frontiers in medicine, 2024

5 citations

Abstract

Fusarium solani, as an opportunistic pathogen, can infect individuals with immunosuppression, neutropenia, hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT), or other high-risk factors, leading to invasive or localized infections. Particularly in patients following allogeneic HSCT, Fusarium solani is more likely to cause invasive or disseminated infections. This study focuses on a pediatric patient who underwent HSCT for severe aplastic anemia. Although initial blood cultures were negative, an abnormality was detected in the 1,3-β-D-glucan test (G test) post-transplantation. To determine the causative agent, blood samples were subjected to metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) and blood cultures simultaneously. Surprisingly, the results of matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time-of-flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) and mNGS differed slightly, with mNGS identifying Nectria haematonectria, while MALDI-TOF MS based on culture showed Fusarium solani. To clarify the results, Sanger sequencing was performed for further detection, and the results were consistent with those of MALDI-TOF MS. Since the accuracy of Sanger sequencing is higher than that of mNGS, the diagnosis was revised to invasive Fusarium solani infection. With advancements in technology, various detection methods for invasive fungi have been developed in recent years, such as mNGS, which has high sensitivity. While traditional methods may be time-consuming, they are important due to their high…

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