ArticleInfection and drug resistance2023
Diagnostic Performance of Metagenomic Next⁃Generation Sequencing in the Diagnosis of Prosthetic Joint Infection Using Tissue Specimens.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative diagnostic accuracy of next-generation sequencing in different specimen types for periprosthetic joint infection: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026Pooled it
- Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) versus tissue culture technique (TCT) in diagnosis of spinal infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2025Pooled it
- Diagnostic Performance of Bronchoalveolar Lavage Fluid Metagenomic Next‑generation Sequencing versus Conventional Microbiological Tests in Immunocompromised and Immunocompetent Patients with Pulmonary Infection.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
- Blood Cell Ratio Combinations for Diagnosing Periprosthetic Joint Infections: A Preliminary Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- The application value and challenges of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection after arthroplasty.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Review
- Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing Improves the Diagnosis Efficiency of Mixed Periprosthetic Joint Infections.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Culture, Histopathology, and mNGS for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Using Periprosthetic Tissue Samples: A Prospective Clinical Study.Infection and drug resistance · 2025Article
- Diagnostic Role of Metagenomic Next-Generation Sequencing in Tubercular Orthopedic Implant-Associated Infection.Infection and drug resistance · 2024Article
- Optimal selection of specimens for metagenomic next-generation sequencing in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infections.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
- Metagenomic next-generation sequencing promotes pathogen detection over culture in joint infections with previous antibiotic exposure.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2024Article
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ability of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) diagnosing prosthetic joint infection (PJI) using tissue from hip/knee rapidly and precisely, especially in patients who had received antibiotic treatment within the preceding two weeks. Methods: From May 2020 to March 2022, 52 cases with suspected PJI were enrolled. mNGS was performed on surgical tissue samples. The sensitivity and specificity of mNGS in diagnosis was evaluated using culture in conjunction with MSIS criteria. This study also looked at how antibiotic use affected culture and mNGS efficacy. Results: According to MSIS criteria, 31 of the 44 cases had PJI, and 13 were classified in the aseptic loosening group. Sensitivity, specificity, positive/negative predictive value (PPV/NPV), positive/negative likelihood ratio (PLR/NLR), and area under the curve (AUC) of mNGS assay were 80.6% (71.9-91.8%), 84.6 (73.7-97.9%), 92.6 (84.2-98.7%), 64.7 (58.6-74.7%), 5.241 (4.081-6.693), 0.229 (0.108-0.482) and 0.826 (0.786-0.967), respectively, with MSIS as a reference. When MSIS was used as a reference, the results of culture assay were 45.2% (40.8-51.5%), 100 (100.0-100.0%), 100 (100.0-100.0%), 43.3 (39.1-49.5%), +∞, 0.548 (0.396-0.617) and 0.726 (0.621-0.864), respectively. The AUC values for mNGS and culture were 0.826 and 0.731, respectively, and the differences were insignificant. mNGS demonstrated higher sensitivity than culture in PJI subjects who had previously received antibiotic treatment within 2 weeks (69.5% vs 23.1%, P = 0.03). Conclusion: In our series, mNGS yield a higher sensitivity for diagnosis and pathogen detection of PJI compared to microbiological culture. Additionally, mNGS is less affected by prior antibiotic exposure.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.