| Literature DB >> 35221789 |
Chun-Rong Ju1, Qiao-Yan Lian1, Wei-Jie Guan1, Ao Chen1, Jian-Heng Zhang1, Xin Xu1,2, Rong-Chang Chen3, Shi-Yue Li1, Jian-Xing He1,2.
Abstract
Background: Accurate identification of pathogens is essential for the diagnosis and control of infections. We aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) and conventional detection methods (CDM) in lung transplant recipients (LTRs).Entities:
Keywords: conventional detection methods; infection; lung transplant recipients; metagenomic next-generation sequencing; pathogen
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35221789 PMCID: PMC8866178 DOI: 10.3389/ti.2022.10265
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Transpl Int ISSN: 0934-0874 Impact factor: 3.782
Patient and sample characteristics.
| Characteristics | Value |
|---|---|
| Lung transplant recipients ( | |
| Age (years), mean ± SD | 56.1 ± 13.3 |
| Sex (male, %) | 90 (84.1%) |
| BMI (kg/m2), mean ± SD | 20.2 ± 3.6 |
| Primary indications for lung transplantation, | |
| COPD | 36 (33.6%) |
| Interstitial lung disease | 46 (43.0%) |
| Bronchiectasis | 10 (9.4%) |
| Pneumosilicosis | 4 (3.7%) |
| Eisenmenger syndrome | 4 (3.7%) |
| Pulmonary arterial hypertension | 2 (1.9%) |
| BOS | 2 (1.9%) |
| PLAM | 1 (0.9%) |
| Re-transplantation | 2 (1.9%) |
| Type of lung transplantation | |
| Unilateral lung transplantation | 60 (56.1%) |
| Bilateral lung transplantation | 41 (38.3%) |
| Heart−lung transplantation | 6 (5.6%) |
| Total number of samples ( | |
| Sample type, | |
| BALF | 159 (97.5%) |
| Blood | 2 (1.2%) |
| CSF | 1 (0.6%) |
| Exudate from the chest wall mass | 1 (0.6%) |
| Time from transplant to sampling (days), median (IQR) | 108 (18–419) |
| Clinical symptoms at sampling, | |
| Fever | 21 (12.9%) |
| Cough/purulent sputum | 134 (82.2%) |
| Dyspnea | 74 (45.4%) |
| Chest tightness/pain | 27 (16.6%) |
| Hemoptysis | 6 (3.7%) |
| Headache | 1 (0.6%) |
| Antimicrobial prophylaxis at sampling, | |
| | 134 (82.2%) |
| | 21 (12.9%) |
| | 52 (31.9%) |
| | 123 (75.5%) |
| Ganciclovir | 79 (48.5%) |
| | 18 (11.0%) |
| None | 9 (5.5%) |
COPD, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease; CSF, cerebrospinal fluid; PLAM, pulmonary lymphangioleiomyomatosis; BOS, bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome.
β-Lactam: including meropenem, imipenem, piperacillin and cefoperazone.
Quinolones including moxifloxacin and levofloxacin.
Glycopeptides including vancomycin and teicoplanin.
Triazoles including voriconazole and posaconazole.
Other antibiotics including trimethoprim‐sulfamethoxazole, minocycline and linezolid.
FIGURE 1Taxonomic distribution of pathogens identified with mNGS in LTRs.
Comparison of mNGS and CDM findings in all samples.
| mNGS | CDM | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| + | − | ||
| + | 84 | 52 | 136 |
| − | 7 | 20 | 27 |
| Total | 91 | 72 | 163 |
+, positive; −, negative; mNGS, metagenomic next-generation sequencing; CDM, conventional detection methods.
FIGURE 2Pathogen detection congruence of mNGS and CDM.
FIGURE 3Comparison of chest computed tomographic (CT) images before and after treatment in four patients whose treatment regimens were switched thoroughly according to the mNGS findings. (A) CT images from a patient diagnosed as having Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia according to mNGS; CT images showing significant improvement of infiltration after treatment (right) compared with that before treatment (left); (B) CT images of disseminated nocardiosis before and after treatment; (C) CT images of NTM pulmonary disease before and after treatment; (D) CT images of acute rejection before and after treatment.