ArticleBMC infectious diseases2024
High utility of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid metagenomic next-generation sequencing approach for etiological diagnosis of pneumonia.
Article in BMC infectious diseases, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Microbial DNA analysis of paired blood-bronchoalveolar lavage fluid in post-HSCT patients with pneumonia implying application conditions of blood as a surrogate in pathogen detection.Respiratory research · 2026Article
- Pneumonia caused by co-infection with Mycobacterium tuberculosis and Pneumocystis jirovecii leading to acute respiratory distress syndrome in an HIV-negative immunocompromised patient: a case report and literature review.BMC infectious diseases · 2026Review
- Molecular analysis of carbapenem-resistantFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Pertussis is identified among common respiratory diseases: A case report.SAGE open medical case reports · 2026Article
- Next-generation sequencing in the etiological diagnosis of severe childhood pneumonia.Frontiers in pediatrics · 2026Review
- Clinical value of radial endobronchial ultrasound combined with metagenomic next-generation sequencing in the malignant tumors patients with pulmonary infection.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Article
- Microbial cell-free DNA sequencing of bronchoalveolar lavage fluid improves diagnostic yield and may add clinical utility in immunocompromised patients with severe pneumonia.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2025Article
- Differences in Non-Pathogenic Lung-Colonizing Bacteria Among Patients with Different Types of Pneumonia: A Retrospective Study.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Rapid, season-specific PCR testing versus traditional diagnostics for pneumonia in the emergency department.BMC pulmonary medicine · 2025Article
- Pathogenic profiles and lower respiratory tract microbiota in severe pneumonia patients using metagenomic next-generation sequencing.Advanced biotechnology · 2025Article
- Advances in diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer-associated obstructive pneumonia and lung abscess: synergistic strategies for infection control and antitumor therapy.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Review
- Clinical application of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in the diagnosis of severe pneumonia pathogens.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2025Article
- Identification of a Novel Nucleic Acid Target for the Rapid and Specific Detection ofAvicenna journal of medical biotechnologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundFor patients with pneumonia, the rapid detection of pathogens is still a major global problem in clinical practice because traditional diagnostic techniques for infection are time-consuming and insensitive. Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) is a novel technique that has the potential to improve pathogen diagnosis. This study aimed to investigate the microbiological diagnostic ability of mNGS compared with conventional culture and to determine the optimal time to test patients for pneumonia.
methodsA prospective study using data from June 2020 to June 2021 was performed at a tertiary teaching hospital in China. We included 56 patients from all adult patients with a clinical diagnosis of pneumonia. Blood and bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) samples were taken for simultaneous mNGS and conventional culture testing.
resultsAll 56 patients underwent both conventional culture and mNGS. Of these patients, 37 were diagnosed with severe pneumonia and 17 were diagnosed with non-severe pneumonia. The top three pathogenic bacteria detected by mNGS were Acinetobacter baumannii, Klebsiella pneumoniae, and Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Enterococcus faecium was detected more frequently in the non-severe pneumonia group (4 vs. 0, p < 0.05). The findings revealed that the detection rate of mNGS (84%) was superior to that of conventional culture methods (48%). Notably, the percentage of mNGS-positive BALF samples (46/56, 82.14%) was significantly greater than that of blood samples (27/56, 48.21%). The etiological comparison demonstrated that mNGS-positive samples, which received clinical approval, tended to be associated with a more normalized temperature, lower PCO2 levels, and a higher SOFA score than mNGS-negative samples (p = 0.022, p = 0.0.028, and p = 0.038, respectively).
conclusionsIn this study, we discovered that the etiology of lung infections frequently involves multiple pathogens. The use of mNGS in BALF is instrumental for detecting nonviral pathogens associated with lung infections. Although the rate of positive blood NGS results is significantly influenced by various clinical factors, for patients suspected of having viral, Legionella, or tsutsugamushi infections, plasma mNGS could serve as a complementary diagnostic tool.
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.