Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36673134›Full record

ArticleDiagnostics (Basel, Switzerland)2023

The Clinical Impact of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing (mNGS) Test in Hospitalized Patients with Suspected Sepsis: A Multicenter Prospective Study.

Yi-Hui Zuo, Yi-Xing Wu, Wei-Ping Hu, Yan Chen, Yu-Ping Li, Zhen-Ju Song, Zhe Luo, Min-Jie Ju, Min-Hua Shi, Shu-Yun Xu and 5 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors at 8 institutions in 1 country.

Yi-Hui ZuoDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Zhongshan Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Fenglin Road 180, Xuhui District, Shanghai 200032, China.
Yi-Xing WuDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Zhongshan Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Fenglin Road 180, Xuhui District, Shanghai 200032, China.
Wei-Ping HuDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Zhongshan Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Fenglin Road 180, Xuhui District, Shanghai 200032, China.
Yan ChenDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Second Xiangya Hospital of Central South University, Mid Renmin Road 139, Changsha 410011, China.
Yu-Ping LiDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Fuxue Alley 2, Lucheng District, Wenzhou 325015, China.
Zhen-Ju SongDepartment of Emergency, Zhongshan Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fenglin Road 180, Xuhui District, Shanghai 200032, China.
Zhe LuoDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongshan Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Fenglin Road 180, Xuhui District, Shanghai 200032, China.
Min-Jie JuDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Zhongshan Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Fenglin Road 180, Xuhui District, Shanghai 200032, China.
Min-Hua ShiDepartment of Pulmonary Medicine, The Second Affiliated Hospital of Suzhou University, Sanxiang Road 1055, Gusu District, Suzhou 215004, China.
Shu-Yun XuDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Tongji Hospital of Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Jiefang Avenue 1095, Qiaokou District, Wuhan 430030, China.
Hua ZhouDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University, Bunichi West Road 1367, Yuhang District, Hangzhou 310003, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6397-3203
Xiang LiDepartment of Critical Care Medicine, Central Hospital of Minhang District, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Xinsong Road 170, Minhang District, Shanghai 201199, China.
Zhi-Jun JieDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Shanghai Fifth People's Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Ruili Road 128, Minhang District, Shanghai 200240, China.
Xue-Dong LiuDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Qingdao Municipal Hospital, Jiaozhou Road 1, North City District, Qingdao 266071, China.
Jing ZhangDepartment of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Zhongshan Hospital, Shanghai Medical College, Fudan University, Fenglin Road 180, Xuhui District, Shanghai 200032, China.
Shanghai Medical College of Fudan University · CNCentral South University · CNFudan University · CNQingdao University · CNTongji Hospital · CNWenzhou Medical University · CNZhejiang University · CNZhongshan Hospital · CN

Funding

National Natural Science Foundation of China 81970035Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality 19DZ1920104Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality 20DZ2261200
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Metagenomic Next Generation Sequencing (mNGS) has the potential to detect pathogens rapidly. We aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of mNGS in hospitalized patients with suspected sepsis and evaluate its role in guiding antimicrobial therapy. Methods: A multicenter, prospective cohort study was performed. We enrolled patients with suspected sepsis, collected clinical characteristics and blood samples, and recorded the 30-day survival. Diagnostic efficacy of mNGS test and blood culture was compared, and the clinical impact of mNGS on antibiotic regimen modification was analyzed. Results: A total of 277 patients were enrolled, and 162 were diagnosed with sepsis. The mortality was 44.8% (121/270). The mNGS test exhibited shorter turn-out time (27.0 (26.0, 29.0) vs. 96.0 (72.0, 140.3) hours, p < 0.001) and higher sensitivity (90.5% vs. 36.0%, p < 0.001) compared with blood culture, especially for fungal infections. The mNGS test showed better performance for patients with mild symptoms, prior antibiotic use, and early stage of infection than blood culture, and was capable of guiding antibiotic regimen modification and improving prognosis. Higher reads of pathogens detected by mNGS were related to 30-day mortality (p = 0.002). Conclusions: Blood mNGS testing might be helpful for early etiological diagnosis of patients with suspected sepsis, guiding the antibiotic regimen modification and improving prognosis.

Indexed as

antibiotic therapyetiological diagnosismetagenomic next generation sequencing (mNGS)prognosissepsis

Identifiers

PMID36673134
PMCPMC9857658
OpenAlexW4316467881

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.