Fungal infections diagnosis - Past, present and future

Despite the scientific advances observed in the recent decades and the emergence of new methodologies, the diagnosis of systemic fungal infections persists as a problematic issue. Fungal cultivation, the stan-dard method that allows a proven diagnosis, has numerous disadvantages, as low sensitivity (only 50% of the patients present positive fungal cultures), and long growth time. These are factors that delay the patient's treatment and, consequently, lead to higher hospital costs. To improve the accuracy and quickness of fungal infections diagnosis, several new methodologies attempt to be implemented in clinical microbiology laboratories. Most of these innovative methods are independent of pathogen isolation, which means that the diagnosis goes from being considered proven to probable. In spite of the advantage of being culture-independent, the majority of the methods lack standardization. PCR-based methods are becoming more and more commonly used, which has earned them an important place in hospital laboratories. This can be perceived now, as PCR-based methodologies have proved to be an essential tool fighting against the COVID-19 pandemic. This review aims to go through the main steps of the diagnosis for systemic fungal infection, from diagnostic classifications, through methodologies considered as "gold standard", to the molecular methods currently used, and finally mentioning some of the more futuristic approaches.(c) 2021 Institut Pasteur. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.This work was supported by the UID/BIA/04050/2013 (POCI-01-0145-FEDER-007569) and UID/BIA/04050/2019 strategic programs, which is funded by national funds through the FCT-Fundacao para a Ciência e Tecnologia, and by the ERDF-European Regional Devel-opment Fund through the COMPETE2020-Programa Operacional Competitividade e Internacionalizacao (POCI) and Sistema de Apoio à Investigacao Cientifica e Tecnol?ogica (SAICT)