ArticleInfection and drug resistance2025
Comparison of the Diagnostic Performance of Culture, Histopathology, and mNGS for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Using Periprosthetic Tissue Samples: A Prospective Clinical Study.
Article in Infection and drug resistance, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Background: This study evaluated the applicability of histopathology, culture, and Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Methods: In this prospective trial, 215 consecutive patients with suspected knee PJI were enrolled. Tissue specimens were aseptically collected and processed for histopathological analysis, culture, and mNGS. PJI diagnosis was primarily based on the 2011 MSIS criteria, with reference to the 2018 ICM criteria for improved diagnostic accuracy. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) of each diagnostic method were calculated. Results: Among 58 patients included in the final analysis, 38 were diagnosed with PJI and 20 without PJI. The mNGS assay demonstrated a sensitivity of 63.2% (95% CI: 53.6-77.7%), specificity of 80.0% (75.7-90.1%), PPV of 85.7% (76.4-95.3%), NPV of 53.3% (44.6-61.2%), PLR of 1.84 (1.22-2.77), and NLR of 0.27 (0.10-0.40). Culture showed higher specificity at 95.0% (84.6-99.8%) and PPV at 96.5% (88.7-99.7%), with sensitivity of 68.4% (58.2-78.9%). Histopathology exhibited 52.6% sensitivity and perfect specificity (100%). The most commonly detected pathogens by both culture and mNGS were Conclusion: mNGS shows promise as a complementary tool for diagnosing PJI, especially in culture-negative or atypical cases. However, it did not outperform conventional methods in accuracy. Its limitations-including a high false-positive rate, interpretive challenges, and lack of susceptibility data-warrant cautious use. Further large-scale studies are needed to define its role in clinical decision-making.
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.