通过整合元基因组下一代测序和传统诊断方法研究中枢神经系统感染的诊断策略。

IF 2.9 3区 医学 Q2 INFECTIOUS DISEASES Infection and Drug Resistance Pub Date : 2024-11-05 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.2147/IDR.S483985
Zhen Zhang, Lei Tian
{"title":"通过整合元基因组下一代测序和传统诊断方法研究中枢神经系统感染的诊断策略。","authors":"Zhen Zhang, Lei Tian","doi":"10.2147/IDR.S483985","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The optimal strategy for detecting central nervous system infections (CNSI) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a one-year, multicenter retrospective study, we examined the efficacy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) in comparison to conventional pathogen diagnostic techniques for CSF in diagnosing CNSI. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and Youden index for each diagnostic approach. Additionally, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed, and the area under the curve (AUC) was determined to assess the diagnostic performance of each method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 68 patients, comprising both adults and children, who were suspected of having CNSI. Through the application of comprehensive clinical interpretation (CCI), the sensitivity and specificity of mNGS were found to be 67.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 50.85-80.87%) and 45.8% (95% CI: 27.89-64.92%), respectively. In comparison, traditional pathogenic diagnostic methods indicated that the culture method demonstrated a sensitivity of 10.6% (95% CI: 4.63-22.6%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI: 84.54-100%). Furthermore, the sensitivity and specificity of the peripheral blood nucleated cell count were determined to be 34.0% (95% confidence interval: 22.17-48.33%) and 57.1% (95% confidence interval: 36.54-75.53%), respectively. CSF nucleated cell count demonstrated a sensitivity of 66.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51.67-77.83%) and a specificity of 61.9% (95% CI: 40.87-79.25%). In comparison, the CSF protein content exhibited a sensitivity of 63.8% (95% CI: 49.54-76.03%) and a specificity of 57.1% (95% CI: 36.54-75.53%). When combining mNGS with traditional methodologies, the overall sensitivity increased to 91.3% (95% CI: 79.67-96.56%), although the specificity was reduced to 18.2% (95% CI: 7.31-38.51%). The area under the ROC curve for culture, peripheral blood nucleated cell count, mNGS, CSF nucleated cell count, and CSF protein content were 0.8088, 0.6038, 0.6103, 0.5588, and 0.5588, respectively. The variation in CSF nucleated cell count did not significantly affect the diagnostic efficacy of mNGS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Currently, both mNGS and traditional diagnostic methods encounter substantial challenges in diagnosing CNSI.</p>","PeriodicalId":13577,"journal":{"name":"Infection and Drug Resistance","volume":"17 ","pages":"4865-4873"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11550915/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"An Investigation into Diagnostic Strategies for Central Nervous System Infections Through the Integration of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing and Conventional Diagnostic Methods.\",\"authors\":\"Zhen Zhang, Lei Tian\",\"doi\":\"10.2147/IDR.S483985\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The optimal strategy for detecting central nervous system infections (CNSI) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples remains unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In a one-year, multicenter retrospective study, we examined the efficacy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) in comparison to conventional pathogen diagnostic techniques for CSF in diagnosing CNSI. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and Youden index for each diagnostic approach. Additionally, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed, and the area under the curve (AUC) was determined to assess the diagnostic performance of each method.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 68 patients, comprising both adults and children, who were suspected of having CNSI. Through the application of comprehensive clinical interpretation (CCI), the sensitivity and specificity of mNGS were found to be 67.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 50.85-80.87%) and 45.8% (95% CI: 27.89-64.92%), respectively. In comparison, traditional pathogenic diagnostic methods indicated that the culture method demonstrated a sensitivity of 10.6% (95% CI: 4.63-22.6%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI: 84.54-100%). Furthermore, the sensitivity and specificity of the peripheral blood nucleated cell count were determined to be 34.0% (95% confidence interval: 22.17-48.33%) and 57.1% (95% confidence interval: 36.54-75.53%), respectively. CSF nucleated cell count demonstrated a sensitivity of 66.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51.67-77.83%) and a specificity of 61.9% (95% CI: 40.87-79.25%). In comparison, the CSF protein content exhibited a sensitivity of 63.8% (95% CI: 49.54-76.03%) and a specificity of 57.1% (95% CI: 36.54-75.53%). When combining mNGS with traditional methodologies, the overall sensitivity increased to 91.3% (95% CI: 79.67-96.56%), although the specificity was reduced to 18.2% (95% CI: 7.31-38.51%). The area under the ROC curve for culture, peripheral blood nucleated cell count, mNGS, CSF nucleated cell count, and CSF protein content were 0.8088, 0.6038, 0.6103, 0.5588, and 0.5588, respectively. The variation in CSF nucleated cell count did not significantly affect the diagnostic efficacy of mNGS.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Currently, both mNGS and traditional diagnostic methods encounter substantial challenges in diagnosing CNSI.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13577,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Infection and Drug Resistance\",\"volume\":\"17 \",\"pages\":\"4865-4873\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11550915/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Infection and Drug Resistance\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483985\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"INFECTIOUS DISEASES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Infection and Drug Resistance","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S483985","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"INFECTIOUS DISEASES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:检测脑脊液(CSF)样本中中枢神经系统感染(CNSI)的最佳策略仍不明确:在一项为期一年的多中心回顾性研究中,我们考察了元基因组新一代测序(mNGS)与脑脊液传统病原体诊断技术相比在诊断 CNSI 方面的功效。我们计算了每种诊断方法的敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值 (PPV)、阴性预测值 (NPV) 和尤登指数。此外,我们还构建了接收者操作特征曲线(ROC),并确定了曲线下面积(AUC),以评估每种方法的诊断性能:研究共纳入 68 名疑似 CNSI 患者,包括成人和儿童。通过应用综合临床解释 (CCI),发现 mNGS 的敏感性和特异性分别为 67.6%(95% 置信区间 [CI]:50.85-80.87%)和 45.8%(95% 置信区间:27.89-64.92%)。与传统的病原体诊断方法相比,培养法的灵敏度为 10.6%(95% CI:4.63-22.6%),特异性为 100%(95% CI:84.54-100%)。此外,外周血有核细胞计数的敏感性和特异性分别为 34.0%(95% 置信区间:22.17-48.33%)和 57.1%(95% 置信区间:36.54-75.53%)。CSF 有核细胞计数的敏感性为 66.0%(95% 置信区间:51.67-77.83%),特异性为 61.9%(95% 置信区间:40.87-79.25%)。相比之下,CSF 蛋白质含量的敏感性为 63.8%(95% CI:49.54-76.03%),特异性为 57.1%(95% CI:36.54-75.53%)。将 mNGS 与传统方法相结合后,总体灵敏度增加到 91.3%(95% CI:79.67-96.56%),但特异性降低到 18.2%(95% CI:7.31-38.51%)。培养、外周血有核细胞计数、mNGS、CSF 有核细胞计数和 CSF 蛋白含量的 ROC 曲线下面积分别为 0.8088、0.6038、0.6103、0.5588 和 0.5588。CSF 有核细胞计数的变化对 mNGS 的诊断效果没有明显影响:结论:目前,mNGS 和传统诊断方法在诊断 CNSI 方面都面临巨大挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
An Investigation into Diagnostic Strategies for Central Nervous System Infections Through the Integration of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing and Conventional Diagnostic Methods.

Purpose: The optimal strategy for detecting central nervous system infections (CNSI) in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples remains unclear.

Methods: In a one-year, multicenter retrospective study, we examined the efficacy of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) in comparison to conventional pathogen diagnostic techniques for CSF in diagnosing CNSI. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and Youden index for each diagnostic approach. Additionally, receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were constructed, and the area under the curve (AUC) was determined to assess the diagnostic performance of each method.

Results: The study included 68 patients, comprising both adults and children, who were suspected of having CNSI. Through the application of comprehensive clinical interpretation (CCI), the sensitivity and specificity of mNGS were found to be 67.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 50.85-80.87%) and 45.8% (95% CI: 27.89-64.92%), respectively. In comparison, traditional pathogenic diagnostic methods indicated that the culture method demonstrated a sensitivity of 10.6% (95% CI: 4.63-22.6%) and a specificity of 100% (95% CI: 84.54-100%). Furthermore, the sensitivity and specificity of the peripheral blood nucleated cell count were determined to be 34.0% (95% confidence interval: 22.17-48.33%) and 57.1% (95% confidence interval: 36.54-75.53%), respectively. CSF nucleated cell count demonstrated a sensitivity of 66.0% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 51.67-77.83%) and a specificity of 61.9% (95% CI: 40.87-79.25%). In comparison, the CSF protein content exhibited a sensitivity of 63.8% (95% CI: 49.54-76.03%) and a specificity of 57.1% (95% CI: 36.54-75.53%). When combining mNGS with traditional methodologies, the overall sensitivity increased to 91.3% (95% CI: 79.67-96.56%), although the specificity was reduced to 18.2% (95% CI: 7.31-38.51%). The area under the ROC curve for culture, peripheral blood nucleated cell count, mNGS, CSF nucleated cell count, and CSF protein content were 0.8088, 0.6038, 0.6103, 0.5588, and 0.5588, respectively. The variation in CSF nucleated cell count did not significantly affect the diagnostic efficacy of mNGS.

Conclusion: Currently, both mNGS and traditional diagnostic methods encounter substantial challenges in diagnosing CNSI.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Infection and Drug Resistance
Infection and Drug Resistance Medicine-Pharmacology (medical)
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
7.70%
发文量
826
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: About Journal Editors Peer Reviewers Articles Article Publishing Charges Aims and Scope Call For Papers ISSN: 1178-6973 Editor-in-Chief: Professor Suresh Antony An international, peer-reviewed, open access journal that focuses on the optimal treatment of infection (bacterial, fungal and viral) and the development and institution of preventative strategies to minimize the development and spread of resistance.
期刊最新文献
Cefiderocol in the Successful Treatment of Complicated Hospital-Acquired K. pneumoniae NDM, OXA48 Intraabdominal Infection. Five Years' Experience with Respiratory Syncytial Virus Among Hospitalized Patients: A Retrospective Study from Jazan, Saudi Arabia. Tuberculous Spondylitis and Paravertebral Abscess Formation Following Vertebroplasty: A Case Report and Review of the Literature. A Novel Variant of KPC-179 Conferring Ceftazidime-Avibactam Resistance in a Carbapenem-Resistant Klebsiella pneumoniae Isolate. Prevalence and Molecular Characteristics of 16S rRNA Methylase Genes in Clinical Isolates of Carbapenem-Resistant Enterobacterales.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1