ArticleIn vivo (Athens, Greece)
Pathogenic Detection by Metagenomic Next-generation Sequencing in Skin and Soft Tissue Infection.
Article in In vivo (Athens, Greece). The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Effect of adding metronidazole to meropenem on clinical efficacy in complicated intra-abdominal infections: a retrospective study.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Article
- Performance evaluation of mNGS in pathogen diagnosis of skin and soft tissue infections and its optimization effect on antibiotic decision-making.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
aimSkin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) can be life-threatening, but the conventional bacterial cultures have low sensitivity and are time-consuming. Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is widely used as a diagnostic tool for detecting pathogens from infection sites. However, the use of mNGS for pathogen detection in SSTIs and related research is still relatively limited. PATIENTS AND
methodsFrom January 2020 to October 2021, 19 SSTI samples from 16 patients were collected in a single center (Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taichung, Taiwan). The clinical samples were simultaneously subjected to mNGS and conventional bacterial culture methods to detect pathogens. Clinical characteristics were prospectively collected through electronic chart review. The microbiological findings from conventional bacterial culture and mNGS were analyzed and compared.
resultsThe mNGS method detected a higher proportion of multiple pathogens in SSTIs compared to conventional bacterial culture methods. Pseudomonas spp. was among the most commonly identified Gram-negative bacilli using mNGS. Additionally, the mNGS method identified several rare pathogens in patients with SSTIs, including Granulicatella adiacens, Bacillus thuringiensis, and Bacteroides fragilis. Antimicrobial resistance genes were detected in 10 samples (52.6%) using the mNGS method, including genes for extended-spectrum beta-lactamase, Ambler class C β-lactamases, and carbapenemase.
conclusionmNGS not only plays an important role in the detection of pathogens in soft tissue infections, but also informs clinical professionals about the presence of additional microbes that may be important for treatment decisions. Further studies comparing conventional pathogen culture with the mNGS method in SSTIs are required.
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.