ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2025
The clinic application of mNGS and ENA-78 assays to identify intra-amniotic infection/inflammation.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Intra-amniotic infection: diagnosis, nomenclature, clinical significance, management, and microbiologic tools used for the diagnosis.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The objective of this study is to explore whether metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) and Epithelial Neutrophil Activating Peptide-78 (ENA-78) assays in the amniotic fluid (AF) of patients with preterm labor (PTL) could be employed for diagnosing intra-amniotic infection/inflammation (IAI/I) and predict the outcomes of emergency cerclage in women with cervical insufficiency(CI). Methods: AF samples from 40 patients were subjected to PTL were subjected to mNGS and microbial culture to diagnose intra-amniotic infection known as microbial invasion of the amniotic cavity (MIAC); ELISA was used to analyze ENA-78 levels for prediction of intra-amniotic inflammation (IAI). Pregnancy outcomes were compared, the predictive performance of mNGS and ENA-78 were assessed to evaluate the efficacy of emergency cervical cerclage. Results: The diagnosis rate of MIAC was higher with mNGS (17.5%) compared to microbial culture (2.5%). AF ENA-78 levels were significantly higher in IAI patients than in non-IAI/I patients. ENA-78 demonstrated certain accuracy in identifying IAI, with sensitivity and specificity of 73.3% and 100%, respectively. Compared with non-IAI/I patients, patients with MIAC or IAI exhibited poor pregnancy outcomes after cervical cerclage. Conclusions: mNGS and ENA-78 assays are valuable means for assessing the state of infection/inflammation in the amniotic cavity and predicting the outcomes of emergency cerclage.
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.