Mu Xu, Luo Hongmin, Li Hanhua, Chen Shenghua, Han Yuyang, Zhang Lin, Liu Wei, Qiao Weilong, Zheng Shaoyi, Huang Zhifeng
Guangdong Cardiovascular Institute, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
Department of Burns and Wound Repair Surgery, Guangdong Provincial People's Hospital, Guangdong Academy of Medical Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2025 Jun 3;15:1570776. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2025.1570776. eCollection 2025.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the clinical microbial profile of patients with granulomatous lobular mastitis (GLM) and compare various detection methods to identify the most effective approach for pathogen detection, which could help enhance clinical diagnosis and treatment. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data from 84 patients diagnosed with GLM, assessed the composition of pathogenic microorganisms in these patients, and compared the effectiveness of different sampling methods and detection techniques. RESULTS: () was identified as the predominant microorganism among GLM patients. The positivity rate was low in skin swabs (10%) but similar in pus (40%) and tissue samples (37%). After antibiotic treatment, the pathogen detection rate of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) (54.55%) was found to be higher than that of culture-based methods (27.27%). Among the GLM cases with pathogenic infection, although mNGS demonstrated higher sensitivity (75.0%) than culture tests (50.0%), both methods exhibited 100.0% specificity. However, the time for obtaining results with mNGS was significantly shorter (1.2 ± 0.41 days) compared to bacterial culture (5.5 ± 0.64 days) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that pus was the most suitable sample type for microbial evidence collection in patients with GLM. mNGS demonstrated superior performance compared to culture in distinguishing infectious from non-infectious cases, with reduced antibiotic interference, faster turnaround time, and higher accuracy. Based on our single-center experience, empirical cephalosporin treatment may be appropriate for these patients. Additionally, surgical intervention remains the most efficient approach for rapid and complete resolution.
目的:本研究旨在评估肉芽肿性小叶性乳腺炎(GLM)患者的临床微生物谱,并比较各种检测方法,以确定病原体检测的最有效方法,这有助于提高临床诊断和治疗水平。 方法:我们回顾性分析了84例诊断为GLM的患者的数据,评估了这些患者中致病微生物的组成,并比较了不同采样方法和检测技术的有效性。 结果:()被确定为GLM患者中的主要微生物。皮肤拭子的阳性率较低(10%),但脓液(40%)和组织样本(37%)的阳性率相似。抗生素治疗后,发现宏基因组下一代测序(mNGS)的病原体检测率(54.55%)高于基于培养的方法(27.27%)。在有致病性感染的GLM病例中,虽然mNGS的敏感性(75.0%)高于培养试验(50.0%),但两种方法的特异性均为100.0%。然而,与细菌培养(5.5±0.64天)相比,mNGS获得结果的时间明显更短(1.2±0.41天)(P<0.05)。 结论:我们的研究结果表明,脓液是GLM患者微生物证据采集最合适的样本类型。与培养相比,mNGS在区分感染性和非感染性病例方面表现更优,抗生素干扰减少,周转时间更快,准确性更高。基于我们的单中心经验,经验性头孢菌素治疗可能适用于这些患者。此外,手术干预仍然是快速彻底解决问题的最有效方法。
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2025-6-3
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-2-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022-3-2
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021-4-19
Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2025-6-10
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017-12-22
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020-1-9
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018-2-6
Health Technol Assess. 2001
Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2025-5
Front Microbiol. 2024-6-6
Front Med (Lausanne). 2024-5-30
Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob. 2024-4-15
Front Microbiol. 2023-4-17