Suppr超能文献

宏基因组二代测序(mNGS)与组织培养技术(TCT)在脊柱感染诊断中的比较:一项系统评价和荟萃分析

Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) versus tissue culture technique (TCT) in diagnosis of spinal infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

作者信息

Li Yan-Cheng, Liu Yan-Xiao, Li Lei, Wang Hua, Zhao Zi-Ru, Yao Zhi-Yuan

机构信息

Department of Orthopedics, The Quzhou Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University (Quzhou People's Hospital), 100 Minjiang Avenue, Kecheng District, Quzhou, 324000, Zhejiang, China.

Department of Orthopedics, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang Chinese Medical University (Zhejiang Provincial Hospital of Chinese Medicine), 54 Youdian Road, Shangcheng District, Hangzhou, 310006, Zhejiang, China.

出版信息

Sci Rep. 2025 Jul 1;15(1):20926. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-06759-3.

Abstract

Spinal infections pose a significant clinical challenge due to the difficulty of early diagnosis. Traditional Tissue Culture Technique (TCT) has limitations, while Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing (mNGS) has emerged as a promising diagnostic tool. However, reports on the diagnostic performance of mNGS and TCT for spinal infections are inconsistent, and there has been a lack of systematic analysis of the evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis included 10 studies involving a total of 770 patients to compare the diagnostic accuracy of mNGS and TCT. A comprehensive literature search was conducted using PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and SinoMed to identify studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of mNGS and TCT for spinal infections. Data were analyzed using Review Manager 5.3 and Stata 16.0 to compute the sensitivity, specificity, and Area Under the Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic Curve (AUC). The meta-analysis revealed pooled estimates for mNGS with a sensitivity of 0.81 (95% CI, 0.74-0.87), specificity of 0.75 (95% CI, 0.48-0.91), and an AUC of 0.85 (95% CI, 0.82-0.88). In contrast, pooled estimates for TCT showed a sensitivity of 0.34 (95% CI, 0.27-0.43), specificity of 0.93 (95% CI, 0.79-0.98), and an AUC of 0.59 (95% CI, 0.55-0.63). While mNGS demonstrates higher sensitivity and overall diagnostic accuracy than TCT, its lower specificity suggests that it may be most effective when used alongside conventional methods to enhance diagnostic reliability in spinal infections.

摘要

由于早期诊断困难,脊柱感染带来了重大的临床挑战。传统组织培养技术(TCT)存在局限性,而宏基因组下一代测序(mNGS)已成为一种有前景的诊断工具。然而,关于mNGS和TCT对脊柱感染的诊断性能的报告并不一致,且缺乏对证据的系统分析。这项系统评价和荟萃分析纳入了10项研究,共涉及770例患者,以比较mNGS和TCT的诊断准确性。使用PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、Cochrane图书馆和中国生物医学文献数据库进行了全面的文献检索,以确定评估mNGS和TCT对脊柱感染诊断准确性的研究。使用Review Manager 5.3和Stata 16.0分析数据,以计算敏感性、特异性和综合受试者工作特征曲线下面积(AUC)。荟萃分析显示,mNGS的合并估计值为敏感性0.81(95%CI,0.74 - 0.87),特异性0.75(95%CI,0.48 - 0.91),AUC为0.85(95%CI,0.82 - 0.88)。相比之下,TCT的合并估计值为敏感性0.34(95%CI,0.27 - 0.43),特异性0.93(95%CI,0.79 - 0.98),AUC为0.59(95%CI,0.55 - 0.63)。虽然mNGS比TCT表现出更高的敏感性和总体诊断准确性,但其较低的特异性表明,当与传统方法一起使用以提高脊柱感染的诊断可靠性时,它可能最有效。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/6e98/12214740/adf4f3670841/41598_2025_6759_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验