Tianlai Lin , Xinzheng Liu , Licong Wu , Qingqing Wu , Haiwen Zeng , Wushuang Li , Hui Tang , Jiangman Zhao , Zhirong Ding
{"title":"新一代宏基因组测序在重症监护病房脓毒症患者血液样本中检测病原体的临床疗效","authors":"Tianlai Lin , Xinzheng Liu , Licong Wu , Qingqing Wu , Haiwen Zeng , Wushuang Li , Hui Tang , Jiangman Zhao , Zhirong Ding","doi":"10.1016/j.ijmmb.2025.100897","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is considered superior to traditional culture for pathogen detection. However, its utility in septic patients based on blood samples remains limited.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This research aimed to compare mNGS and culture-based diagnostics in 78 septic patients, with 25 with sepsis and 53 with septic shock.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Among 68 cases with matching sample types, pathogens of 38 cases were solely identified through mNGS, and in contrast, 2 cases had their pathogens detected by microbiological culture only. Moreover, 17 of 63 cases (26.98 %) were found to be positive by both mNGS and culture, and 6 of 63 cases (9.52 %) came negative under both diagnostic methods. Regardless of prior antibiotic exposure, the positive rate of mNGS, which was 80.77 %, was significantly higher than that of culture (37.18 %). Significantly, among the 38 septic patients diagnosed solely by mNGS, 23 patients achieved a favorable outcome after physicians adjusted the treatment based on the mNGS findings.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In conclusion, mNGS offered a swift and accurate means for pathogen identification, and thus making this approach as a promising technology for detecting sepsis.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":13284,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology","volume":"56 ","pages":"Article 100897"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Clinical efficacy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing for pathogen detection in septic patients based on blood samples in intensive care units\",\"authors\":\"Tianlai Lin , Xinzheng Liu , Licong Wu , Qingqing Wu , Haiwen Zeng , Wushuang Li , Hui Tang , Jiangman Zhao , Zhirong Ding\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ijmmb.2025.100897\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is considered superior to traditional culture for pathogen detection. However, its utility in septic patients based on blood samples remains limited.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>This research aimed to compare mNGS and culture-based diagnostics in 78 septic patients, with 25 with sepsis and 53 with septic shock.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Among 68 cases with matching sample types, pathogens of 38 cases were solely identified through mNGS, and in contrast, 2 cases had their pathogens detected by microbiological culture only. Moreover, 17 of 63 cases (26.98 %) were found to be positive by both mNGS and culture, and 6 of 63 cases (9.52 %) came negative under both diagnostic methods. Regardless of prior antibiotic exposure, the positive rate of mNGS, which was 80.77 %, was significantly higher than that of culture (37.18 %). Significantly, among the 38 septic patients diagnosed solely by mNGS, 23 patients achieved a favorable outcome after physicians adjusted the treatment based on the mNGS findings.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>In conclusion, mNGS offered a swift and accurate means for pathogen identification, and thus making this approach as a promising technology for detecting sepsis.</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13284,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology\",\"volume\":\"56 \",\"pages\":\"Article 100897\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-20\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0255085725001100\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"IMMUNOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Medical Microbiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0255085725001100","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"IMMUNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Clinical efficacy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing for pathogen detection in septic patients based on blood samples in intensive care units
Background
Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is considered superior to traditional culture for pathogen detection. However, its utility in septic patients based on blood samples remains limited.
Methods
This research aimed to compare mNGS and culture-based diagnostics in 78 septic patients, with 25 with sepsis and 53 with septic shock.
Results
Among 68 cases with matching sample types, pathogens of 38 cases were solely identified through mNGS, and in contrast, 2 cases had their pathogens detected by microbiological culture only. Moreover, 17 of 63 cases (26.98 %) were found to be positive by both mNGS and culture, and 6 of 63 cases (9.52 %) came negative under both diagnostic methods. Regardless of prior antibiotic exposure, the positive rate of mNGS, which was 80.77 %, was significantly higher than that of culture (37.18 %). Significantly, among the 38 septic patients diagnosed solely by mNGS, 23 patients achieved a favorable outcome after physicians adjusted the treatment based on the mNGS findings.
Conclusion
In conclusion, mNGS offered a swift and accurate means for pathogen identification, and thus making this approach as a promising technology for detecting sepsis.
期刊介绍:
Manuscripts of high standard in the form of original research, multicentric studies, meta analysis, are accepted. Current reports can be submitted as brief communications. Case reports must include review of current literature, clinical details, outcome and follow up. Letters to the editor must be a comment on or pertain to a manuscript already published in the IJMM or in relation to preliminary communication of a larger study.
Review articles, Special Articles or Guest Editorials are accepted on invitation.