Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36768930›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of molecular sciences2023

Applying Metagenomic Analysis Using Nanopore Sequencer (MinION) for Precision Medicine in Bacterial Keratoconjunctivitis: Comprehensive Validation of Molecular Biological and Conventional Examinations.

Hiroshi Eguchi, Fumika Hotta, Shunji Kusaka

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of molecular sciences, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
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

3 authors.

Hiroshi EguchiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Kindai University, Osakasayama 589-8511, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-4046-1413
Fumika HottaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Kindai University, Osakasayama 589-8511, Japan.
Shunji KusakaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Kindai University, Osakasayama 589-8511, Japan.ORCID 0000-0002-8364-0948

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Smear microscopic examination and culture of the corneal scrapings are the gold standards for the diagnosis of bacterial keratoconjunctivitis. High-sensitivity molecular biological examinations of the ocular surface specimens are used clinically. However, the results require careful interpretation to avoid the unintentional detection of indigenous bacteria. Results of conventional and state-of-the-art examinations require clinical verification for specificity and sensitivity. In this study, smear microscopic examination, culture, and nanopore sequencing using the MinION of ocular surface specimens from eight clinically diagnosed bacterial keratoconjunctivitis cases were performed and compared. Seven of the eight cases (87.5%) were smear positive and five (62.5%) were culture positive. The former showed the same genus in >60% of the classified reads as one specific bacterium inferred from the smear microscopy when sequenced by the MinION. In two of the three culture-negative cases, the smear-positive images were highly reminiscent of the species comprising most of the MinION sequences. Four of the five culture-positive cases were consistent with the most prevalent bacteria in the sequencing results. Probable contamination among specimens processed on the same day were observed. In conclusion, the microscopic examination of the corneal scraping specimens may be more sensitive and specific than the culture examination. Additionally, although metagenomic analysis using the MinION contributes to more precise medication for bacterial keratoconjunctivitis, contamination can affect the results.

Indexed as

KeratoconjunctivitisNanoporesBacteriaHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansPrecision MedicineSequence Analysis, DNAbacterial keratoconjunctivitiscorneal scrapingculturenanopore sequencer (MinION)smear microscopic examination

Identifiers

PMID36768930
PMCPMC9916690

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.