Marra Pedro S, Marra Alexandre R, Chen Eileen, Kobayashi Takaaki, Celeghini Patrícia Deffune, Gutfreund Maria Celidonio, Pardo Isabele, Lopes Gabriel O V, Hsieh Mariana Kim, Boodhoo Nicole A, Fu Daniel, Torres-Espinosa Michael A, Li Yimeng, Deliberato Rodrigo Octávio, Algain Sulwan Mujahid A, Salinas Jorge L, Edmond Michael B, Amgarten Deyvid Emanuel, de Mello Malta Fernanda, Dos Santos Nathalia Villa, Pinho João Renato Rebello, Louine Martineau, Wilson Michael R
School of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Faculdade Israelita de Ciências da Saúde Albert Einstein, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, SP, Brazil.
Open Forum Infect Dis. 2025 May 9;12(5):ofaf274. doi: 10.1093/ofid/ofaf274. eCollection 2025 May.
We aimed to assess the accuracy, clinical efficacy, and limitations of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) for diagnosing infectious meningoencephalitis.
We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of studies that evaluated the performance of mNGS to determine the cause of infectious meningoencephalitis. We explored PubMed, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, and Web of Science up to 12 November 2024. To perform a meta-analysis, we calculated the pooled diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) for mNGS and for conventional microbiological tests (CMTs) compared to the clinical diagnosis.
Thirty-four studies met the inclusion criteria, with mNGS-positive rates ranging from 43.5% to 93.5% for infectious meningoencephalitis. The meta-analysis included 23 studies with 1660 patients. The pooled sensitivity was 0.70 (95% confidence interval [CI], .67-.72), and its specificity was 0.93 (95% CI, .92-.94). The DOR for mNGS was 26.7 (95% CI, 10.4-68.8), compared to 12.2 (95% CI, 3.2-47.0) for CMTs. For tuberculosis meningoencephalitis, mNGS demonstrated a pooled sensitivity of 0.67 (95% CI, .61-.72) and specificity of 0.97 (95% CI, .95-.99), with a DOR of 43.5 (95% CI, 7.4-256.6).
Our review indicates that mNGS can be a valuable diagnostic tool for infectious meningoencephalitis, offering high sensitivity and specificity. mNGS's superior DOR compared to that of CMTs highlights its potential for more accurate diagnoses and targeted interventions. Further research is needed to optimize which patients and at what point in the diagnostic process mNGS should be used.
我们旨在评估宏基因组下一代测序(mNGS)在诊断感染性脑膜脑炎方面的准确性、临床疗效及局限性。
我们对评估mNGS在确定感染性脑膜脑炎病因方面性能的研究进行了系统的文献综述和荟萃分析。我们检索了截至2024年11月12日的PubMed、护理及相关健康累积索引、Embase、Cochrane对照试验中央注册库、ClinicalTrials.gov和科学网。为进行荟萃分析,我们计算了mNGS及传统微生物学检测(CMT)与临床诊断相比的合并诊断比值比(DOR)。
34项研究符合纳入标准,感染性脑膜脑炎的mNGS阳性率在43.5%至93.5%之间。荟萃分析纳入了23项研究,共1660例患者。合并敏感性为0.70(95%置信区间[CI],0.67 - 0.72),特异性为0.93(95%CI,0.92 - 0.94)。mNGS的DOR为26.7(95%CI,10.4 - 68.8),而CMT的DOR为12.2(95%CI,3.2 - 47.0)。对于结核性脑膜脑炎,mNGS的合并敏感性为0.67(95%CI,0.61 - 0.72),特异性为0.97(95%CI,0.95 - 0.99),DOR为43.5(95%CI,7.4 - 256.6)。
我们的综述表明,mNGS可成为诊断感染性脑膜脑炎的有价值诊断工具,具有高敏感性和特异性。与CMT相比,mNGS优越的DOR凸显了其在更准确诊断和靶向干预方面的潜力。需要进一步研究以优化mNGS应在诊断过程中的哪些患者及何时使用。