ArticleCurrent medical science2025
Pathogen Detection in Spinal Infections: Next-Generation Sequencing Versus Conventional Microbiological Methods.
Article in Current medical science, 2025. 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.
- The diagnostic value of metagenomic next-generation sequencing versus traditional microbiological testing in native pyogenic spinal infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis.North American Spine Society journal · 2026Review
- Hierarchical integration of mNGS, PCR, and other conventional methods for precision TB diagnostics.Microbiology spectrum · 2025Article
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
OBJECTIVE AND
backgroundEarly and accurate diagnosis of spinal infections, including spinal tuberculosis, is pivotal for effective treatment but remains challenging. This study aims to assess the diagnostic yield of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) compared with that of conventional microbiological tests (CMTs) in identifying pathogens associated with spinal pathologies, with a special focus on infections leading to surgical interventions.
methodsWe enrolled 85 patients who underwent spinal surgery, comprising 63 patients with clinically diagnosed spinal infections, including patients with spinal tuberculosis, and 22 patients with noninfectious spinal conditions. The procedures involved irrigation and debridement for persistent wound drainage, with subsequent DNA extraction from plasma and joint fluid for mNGS and CMT analysis.
resultsSignificantly increased C-reactive protein (CRP) levels were observed in patients with infections. The mNGS approach showed greater diagnostic sensitivity (92.06%) for detecting pathogens, including Mycobacterium tuberculosis, than did CMTs (36.51%). Despite its low specificity, mNGS had considerable negative predictive value (70.59%), underscoring its utility in ruling out infections.
conclusionsThe mNGS offers superior sensitivity over CMTs in the diagnosis of a variety of spinal infections, notably spinal tuberculosis. This study highlights the potential of mNGS in enhancing the diagnosis of complex spinal infections, thereby informing targeted treatment strategies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40138143What 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.