Author:
Zhang Yi,Cui Peng,Zhang Hao-Cheng,Wu Hong-Long,Ye Ming-Zhi,Zhu Yi-Min,Ai Jing-Wen,Zhang Wen-Hong
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Accurate etiology diagnosis is crucial for central nervous system infections (CNS infections). The diagnostic value of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS), an emerging powerful platform, remains to be studied in CNS infections.
Methods
We conducted a single-center prospective cohort study to compare mNGS with conventional methods including culture, smear and etc. 248 suspected CNS infectious patients were enrolled and clinical data were recorded.
Results
mNGS reported a 90.00% (9/10) sensitivity in culture-positive patients without empirical treatment and 66.67% (6/9) in empirically-treated patients. Detected an extra of 48 bacteria and fungi in culture-negative patients, mNGS provided a higher detection rate compared to culture in patients with (34.45% vs. 7.56%, McNemar test, p < 0.0083) or without empirical therapy (50.00% vs. 25.00%, McNemar test, p > 0.0083). Compared to conventional methods, positive percent agreement and negative percent agreement was 75.00% and 69.11% separately. mNGS detection rate was significantly higher in patients with cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) WBC > 300 * 106/L, CSF protein > 500 mg/L or glucose ratio ≤ 0.3. mNGS sequencing read is correlated with CSF WBC, glucose ratio levels and clinical disease progression.
Conclusion
mNGS showed a satisfying diagnostic performance in CNS infections and had an overall superior detection rate to culture. mNGS may held diagnostic advantages especially in empirically treated patients. CSF laboratory results were statistically relevant to mNGS detection rate, and mNGS could dynamically monitor disease progression.
Funder
Shanghai Municipal Health Bureau
Key Technologies Research and Development Program
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Subject
General Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology,General Medicine
Reference32 articles.
1. The global burden of meningitis. 2018. https://www.meningitis.org/meningitis/the-global-burden-of-meningitis.
2. Leber AL, Everhart K, Balada-Llasat JM, Cullison J, Daly J, Holt S, Lephart P, Salimnia H, Schreckenberger PC, DesJarlais S, et al. Multicenter evaluation of BioFire FilmArray meningitis/encephalitis panel for detection of bacteria, viruses, and yeast in cerebrospinal fluid specimens. J Clin Microbiol. 2016;54:2251–61.
3. Brouwer MC, Thwaites GE, Tunkel AR, van de Beek D. Dilemmas in the diagnosis of acute community-acquired bacterial meningitis. Lancet. 2012;380:1684–92.
4. Li Y, Yin Z, Shao Z, Li M, Liang X, Sandhu HS, Hadler SC, Li J, Sun Y, Li J, et al. Population-based surveillance for bacterial meningitis in China, September 2006–December 2009. Emerg Infect Dis. 2014;20:61–9.
5. Forrester N, Xie Y, Tan Y, Chongsuvivatwong V, Wu X, Bi F, Hadler SC, Jiraphongsa C, Sornsrivichai V, Lin M, Quan Y. A population-based acute meningitis and encephalitis syndromes surveillance in Guangxi, China, May 2007–June 2012. PLoS ONE. 2015;10:e0144366.
Cited by
102 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献