Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37709670›Full record

ArticleBMJ open ophthalmology2023

Comparative evaluation of 16S rRNA metagenomic sequencing in the diagnosis and understanding of bacterial endophthalmitis.

Kazunobu Asao, Noriyasu Hashida, Kazuichi Maruyama, Daisuke Motooka, Teruhisa Tsukamoto, Yoshihiko Usui, Shota Nakamura, Kohji Nishida

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMJ open ophthalmology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Kazunobu AsaoDepartment of Ophthalmology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan.ORCID 0009-0007-5691-0360
Noriyasu HashidaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan nhashida@ophthal.med.osaka-u.ac.jp.
Kazuichi MaruyamaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan.
Daisuke MotookaIntegrated Frontier Research for Medical Science Division, Institute for Open and Transdisciplinary Research Initiatives, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan.
Teruhisa TsukamotoBiology and Translational Research Unit, Department of Medical Innovations, New Drug Research Division, Otsuka Pharmaceutical. Co. Ltd, Naruto, Tokushima, Japan.
Yoshihiko UsuiDepartment of Ophthalmology, Tokyo Medical University, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo, Japan.
Shota NakamuraIntegrated Frontier Research for Medical Science Division, Institute for Open and Transdisciplinary Research Initiatives, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan.
Kohji NishidaDepartment of Ophthalmology, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Suita, Osaka, Japan.
The University of Osaka · JPOtsuka (Japan) · JPTokyo Medical University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate the usefulness of metagenomic analysis in the search for causative organisms of bacterial endophthalmitis. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Twenty-one consecutive treatment-naïve patients (13 men and 8 women; mean age, 60.8±19.8 years) with suspected endophthalmitis were recruited. Vitrectomy was performed to diagnose and treat endophthalmitis. Bacterial culture and metagenomic analysis of the vitreous body were performed. Extracted DNA was analysed using 16S rRNA sequences, and libraries were sequenced on an Illumina MiSeq sequencer. To compare the bacterial composition in each case, α and β diversities were determined.

resultsPatients were categorised into three groups: endophthalmitis cases with matching predominant organisms according to metagenomic analysis and bacterial culture, those with negative results for bacterial culture and those with negative results in both cases. In 7 of 15 culture-negative cases, results from metagenomic analysis could detect pathogens. The diversity of bacterial populations was significantly lower in the group with positive results for predominant bacteria according to culture and metagenomic analysis. All patients with uveitis were included in the group for which the causative pathogen could not be determined by culture or metagenomic analysis. The structures of bacterial populations significantly differed between the positive and negative groups by culture and metagenomic analysis.

conclusionsMetagenomic analysis could be useful for prompt detection of causative pathogens, for precise diagnosis of infection, and as a marker of inflammation processes such as uveitis.

Indexed as

EndophthalmitisEye Infections, BacterialLibrariesAdultAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedRNA, Ribosomal, 16SVitreous BodyRNA, Ribosomal, 16Sdiagnostic tests/investigationinfectioninflammationmicrobiologypathology

Identifiers

PMID37709670
PMCPMC10503327
OpenAlexW4386754123

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.