These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Clinical application of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in patients with different organ system infection: A retrospective observational study.
    Author: Zhang H, Zhou F, Liu X, Huang J.
    Journal: Medicine (Baltimore); 2024 Jan 26; 103(4):e36745. PubMed ID: 38277518.
    Abstract:
    Microbiological identification is essential for appropriate treatment, but conventional methods are time-consuming and have a low sensitivity. In contrast, metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is a culture-free and hypothesis-free technique that can detect a wide array of potential pathogens. This study aimed to reveal the overall diagnostic value of mNGS for infectious diseases of different organ systems and compare the sensitivity and specificity of mNGS with conventional methods. In a retrospective cohort study, 94 patients with mNGS results were enrolled, and clinical data were recorded and analyzed to compare the positive rate of mNGS with traditional methods including as smears, serological tests, and traditional PCR, etc. In this study, mNGS and culture were both positive in 12.77% cases and were both negative in 23.4% cases. There were positive results in 56 cases (54.26%) only by mNGS and 4 cases (4.26%) were positive only by culture. There were significant differences in sensitivity of pathogen detection between of ID and NID group for mNGS (χ2 = 10.461, P = .001)and conventional methods(χ2 = 7.963, P = .005). The positive predictive values and negative predictive values of diagnosing infectious disease by mNGS were 94.12% and 30.77%, respectively. mNGS increased the sensitivity rate by approximately 53.66% compared with that of culture (78.05% vs24.39%; χ2 = 47.248, P < .001) and decreased the specificity rate by 12.5% compared with that of culture (66.67% vs 100.0%; χ2 = 4.8, P = .028). mNGS can identify emerging or rare pathogen and further guide treatment regimens. mNGS has advantages in identifying overall pathogens and bacteria, however, there was no obvious advantage in identifying fungi, virus and tuberculosis. mNGS has higher specificity than conventional methods in identifying pathogens and advantages in detecting emerging or rare pathogens.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]