Cargando…

Analysis of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Results of 25 Pus Samples

PURPOSE: To explore the clinical value of detecting pathogens in pus samples by metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS). METHODS: The 25 pus samples from infected patients were collected in this research. The positive rate and consistency of pathogenic bacteria detected by mNGS and conventiona...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shi, Yuru, Wu, Jing, Liu, Ting, Yue, Li, Liu, Yang, Gu, Yan, Qi, Yingjie
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9653029/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36386420
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S385925
_version_ 1784828599494246400
author Shi, Yuru
Wu, Jing
Liu, Ting
Yue, Li
Liu, Yang
Gu, Yan
Qi, Yingjie
author_facet Shi, Yuru
Wu, Jing
Liu, Ting
Yue, Li
Liu, Yang
Gu, Yan
Qi, Yingjie
author_sort Shi, Yuru
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To explore the clinical value of detecting pathogens in pus samples by metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS). METHODS: The 25 pus samples from infected patients were collected in this research. The positive rate and consistency of pathogenic bacteria detected by mNGS and conventional methods were compared. The pathogen types detected by the two methods were analyzed. Furthermore, the modifications of antibiotic treatment therapy were also evaluated based on mNGS results. RESULTS: The sensitivity of mNGS method in detecting pathogenic bacteria in pus samples was better than that of conventional method (96% vs 40%; P < 0.01). Only 10 samples were detected pathogens by conventional methods, but 24 samples were detected by mNGS method. In specific, the results of conventional methods showed 10 samples had 11 kinds of pathogenic bacteria, of which 9 samples were single pathogen and 1 sample had two kinds of pathogenic bacteria. The results of mNGS method showed 24 samples were detected with 54 kinds of pathogenic bacteria, of which 15 samples were detected with single pathogen, and 9 samples were detected with two or more kinds of pathogenic bacteria. The two methods had 9(36%) consistent results, 14 (56%) completely different results, and 2 (8%) partially consistent results, and the kappa value was 0.19. Notably, mNGS could detect viruses, anaerobic bacteria, and other uncommon pathogens simultaneously. CONCLUSION: The application of mNGS in the detection of pus specimens from different parts not only have high accuracy rate and also reduce the turnaround time of diagnosis. In addition, the performance of mNGS detection of anaerobic bacteria and caustic bacteria is better than conventional methods. The mNGS diagnosis in pus sample may play an important role in clinical diagnosis and treatment strategy decisions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9653029
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-96530292022-11-15 Analysis of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Results of 25 Pus Samples Shi, Yuru Wu, Jing Liu, Ting Yue, Li Liu, Yang Gu, Yan Qi, Yingjie Infect Drug Resist Original Research PURPOSE: To explore the clinical value of detecting pathogens in pus samples by metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS). METHODS: The 25 pus samples from infected patients were collected in this research. The positive rate and consistency of pathogenic bacteria detected by mNGS and conventional methods were compared. The pathogen types detected by the two methods were analyzed. Furthermore, the modifications of antibiotic treatment therapy were also evaluated based on mNGS results. RESULTS: The sensitivity of mNGS method in detecting pathogenic bacteria in pus samples was better than that of conventional method (96% vs 40%; P < 0.01). Only 10 samples were detected pathogens by conventional methods, but 24 samples were detected by mNGS method. In specific, the results of conventional methods showed 10 samples had 11 kinds of pathogenic bacteria, of which 9 samples were single pathogen and 1 sample had two kinds of pathogenic bacteria. The results of mNGS method showed 24 samples were detected with 54 kinds of pathogenic bacteria, of which 15 samples were detected with single pathogen, and 9 samples were detected with two or more kinds of pathogenic bacteria. The two methods had 9(36%) consistent results, 14 (56%) completely different results, and 2 (8%) partially consistent results, and the kappa value was 0.19. Notably, mNGS could detect viruses, anaerobic bacteria, and other uncommon pathogens simultaneously. CONCLUSION: The application of mNGS in the detection of pus specimens from different parts not only have high accuracy rate and also reduce the turnaround time of diagnosis. In addition, the performance of mNGS detection of anaerobic bacteria and caustic bacteria is better than conventional methods. The mNGS diagnosis in pus sample may play an important role in clinical diagnosis and treatment strategy decisions. Dove 2022-11-08 /pmc/articles/PMC9653029/ /pubmed/36386420 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S385925 Text en © 2022 Shi et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Original Research
Shi, Yuru
Wu, Jing
Liu, Ting
Yue, Li
Liu, Yang
Gu, Yan
Qi, Yingjie
Analysis of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Results of 25 Pus Samples
title Analysis of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Results of 25 Pus Samples
title_full Analysis of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Results of 25 Pus Samples
title_fullStr Analysis of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Results of 25 Pus Samples
title_full_unstemmed Analysis of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Results of 25 Pus Samples
title_short Analysis of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Results of 25 Pus Samples
title_sort analysis of metagenomic next-generation sequencing results of 25 pus samples
topic Original Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9653029/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36386420
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S385925
work_keys_str_mv AT shiyuru analysisofmetagenomicnextgenerationsequencingresultsof25pussamples
AT wujing analysisofmetagenomicnextgenerationsequencingresultsof25pussamples
AT liuting analysisofmetagenomicnextgenerationsequencingresultsof25pussamples
AT yueli analysisofmetagenomicnextgenerationsequencingresultsof25pussamples
AT liuyang analysisofmetagenomicnextgenerationsequencingresultsof25pussamples
AT guyan analysisofmetagenomicnextgenerationsequencingresultsof25pussamples
AT qiyingjie analysisofmetagenomicnextgenerationsequencingresultsof25pussamples