Table 3.

Main advantages and disadvantages of the identification and diagnostic methods used for dermatophytes.

Methods of Identification/Diagnosis	Advantages	Disadvantages	Reference
Conventional (culture followed by direct microscopy or histology)	Low cost of materials Well-established standard method	Time-consuming process to obtain the result High false-negative rate	[48,51,96]
Conventional PCR	Better cost–benefit ratio Rapid detection	Post-PCR tests might be necessary to complement the diagnosis	[53]
Nested PCR	Reduces nonspecific binding of PCR products More specific results Good sensitivity	High risk of contamination Prolongs the time to diagnosis	[48,53]
Multiplex PCR	Identification of multiple targets in the same reaction Time saving and rapid diagnosis Higher detection efficacy Reduces the risk of false-negative results	Possibility of nonspecific binding between primers	[48]
PCR-RFLP	Low cost Does not require sophisticated equipment	Use of restriction enzymes is necessary Requires more time for diagnostic analysis Not commonly used for diagnosis	[48]
PCR-ELISA	Higher sensitivity than techniques that use analysis by gel electrophoresis	Elaborate manipulations are necessary Requires more time for diagnostic analysis Not commonly used for diagnosis	[48,53]
Real-time PCR	Low risk of contamination Post-PCR tests are not required Rapid identification Quantitative detection	Specific equipment is necessary Higher cost than conventional PCR	[48,53,65]
MALDI- TOF MS	Identification of the microorganism at the genus, species, and strain level	Difficulty of access or incomplete information of some dermatophyte species in databases used for identification Sister species might be indistinguishable because of similar molecular components	[70,71,72,74,75,77,79,81,85,86,87,93]