Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: Early diagnosis of infectious diseases remains a challenge. This study assessed the diagnostic value of mNGS in infections and explored the effect of various factors on the accuracy of mNGS.
METHODS: An electronic article search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase was performed. A total of 85 papers were eligible for inclusion and analysis. Stata 12.0 was used for statistical calculation to evaluate the efficacy of mNGS for the diagnosis of infectious diseases.
RESULTS: The AUC of 85 studies was 0.88 (95%CI, 0.85-0.90). The AUC of the clinical comprehensive diagnosis and conventional test groups was 0.92 (95%CI, 0.89-0.94) and 0.82 (95%CI, 0.78-0.85), respectively. The results of subgroup analysis indicated that the PLR and NLR were 12.67 (95%CI, 6.01-26.70) and 0.05 (95%CI, 0.03-0.10), respectively, in arthrosis infections. The PLR was 24.41 (95%CI, 5.70-104.58) in central system infections and the NLR of immunocompromised patients was 0.08 (95%CI, 0.01-0.62).
CONCLUSIONS: mNGS demonstrated satisfactory diagnostic performance for infections, especially for bone and joint infections and central system infections. Moreover, mNGS also has a high value in the exclusion of infection in immunocompromised patients.
METHODS: An electronic article search of PubMed, Cochrane Library, and Embase was performed. A total of 85 papers were eligible for inclusion and analysis. Stata 12.0 was used for statistical calculation to evaluate the efficacy of mNGS for the diagnosis of infectious diseases.
RESULTS: The AUC of 85 studies was 0.88 (95%CI, 0.85-0.90). The AUC of the clinical comprehensive diagnosis and conventional test groups was 0.92 (95%CI, 0.89-0.94) and 0.82 (95%CI, 0.78-0.85), respectively. The results of subgroup analysis indicated that the PLR and NLR were 12.67 (95%CI, 6.01-26.70) and 0.05 (95%CI, 0.03-0.10), respectively, in arthrosis infections. The PLR was 24.41 (95%CI, 5.70-104.58) in central system infections and the NLR of immunocompromised patients was 0.08 (95%CI, 0.01-0.62).
CONCLUSIONS: mNGS demonstrated satisfactory diagnostic performance for infections, especially for bone and joint infections and central system infections. Moreover, mNGS also has a high value in the exclusion of infection in immunocompromised patients.
摘要：
目的：感染性疾病的早期诊断仍然是一个挑战。本研究评估了mNGS在感染中的诊断价值，并探讨了各种因素对mNGS准确性的影响。
方法：PubMed的电子文章搜索，科克伦图书馆,进行了Embase。共有85篇论文符合纳入和分析条件。Stata12.0用于统计计算以评估mNGS诊断感染性疾病的功效。
结果：85项研究的AUC为0.88（95CI，0.85-0.90）。临床综合诊断组和常规试验组的AUC分别为0.92(95CI,0.89-0.94)和0.82(95CI,0.78-0.85),分别。亚组分析结果表明，PLR和NLR分别为12.67（95CI，6.01-26.70）和0.05（95CI，0.03-0.10），分别,在关节病感染中。中央系统感染的PLR为24.41（95CI，5.70-104.58），免疫功能低下患者的NLR为0.08（95CI，0.01-0.62）。
结论：mNGS对感染的诊断表现令人满意，特别是骨和关节感染和中枢系统感染。此外，mNGS在免疫功能低下患者的感染排除中也具有很高的价值。
方法：PubMed的电子文章搜索，科克伦图书馆,进行了Embase。共有85篇论文符合纳入和分析条件。Stata12.0用于统计计算以评估mNGS诊断感染性疾病的功效。
结果：85项研究的AUC为0.88（95CI，0.85-0.90）。临床综合诊断组和常规试验组的AUC分别为0.92(95CI,0.89-0.94)和0.82(95CI,0.78-0.85),分别。亚组分析结果表明，PLR和NLR分别为12.67（95CI，6.01-26.70）和0.05（95CI，0.03-0.10），分别,在关节病感染中。中央系统感染的PLR为24.41（95CI，5.70-104.58），免疫功能低下患者的NLR为0.08（95CI，0.01-0.62）。
结论：mNGS对感染的诊断表现令人满意，特别是骨和关节感染和中枢系统感染。此外，mNGS在免疫功能低下患者的感染排除中也具有很高的价值。
