SynthesisEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2026
Nanopore sequencing for microbiological diagnosis of bacterial pneumonia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2026. 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAccurate and timely diagnosis is essential to ensure effective management of bacterial pneumonia to improve patient outcomes. This study aims to evaluate the use of metagenomic nanopore sequencing in the microbiological diagnosis of pneumonia compared to standard diagnostic procedures.
methodsA comprehensive literature search across multiple databases was performed. The risk of bias was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy 2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and area under the curve (AUC) were determined.
resultsThirteen studies were included in the systematic review, with eight eligible for meta-analysis. In the microbiological diagnosis of bacterial pneumonia, the overall sensitivity of nanopore sequencing using both MinION and GridION platforms is 86.08% (95% CI 75.96–92.37) while specificity is 84.97% (95% CI 75.94–91.02). Results show a high PPV (85.13%; 95% CI 77.72–90.38) and high NPV (85.27%; 95% CI 76.79–91.01). Nanopore sequencing also has a high diagnostic value based on the computed AUC (0.922) and DOR (40.68; 95% CI 11.22–147.48). Sensitivity analyses suggest a trend toward higher diagnostic accuracy for bacterial pneumonia with the MinION device and lower accuracy with the GridION platform. We also found that accuracy is higher when the focus of diagnosis is ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) and when endotracheal aspirate alone is utilized as the sample type.
conclusionsNanopore sequencing offers faster, real-time results compared to traditional culture. It also shows higher specificity than short-read metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS), particularly in ventilator-associated pneumonia. Further research is warranted for subgroup analyses to optimize the use of nanopore sequencing in detecting bacterial pneumonia.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41499025What 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.