0
Article ? AI-assigned paper type based on the abstract. Classification may not be perfect — flag errors using the feedback button. Tier 2 ? Original research — experimental, observational, or case-control study. Direct primary evidence. Sign in to save

mNGS 与 Xpert-MTB/RIF 在肺结核诊断中的诊断价值比较:系统综述与荟萃分析

临床医药循证研究 2026 Score: 40 ? 0–100 AI score estimating relevance to the microplastics field. Papers below 30 are filtered from public browse.
馨禾 程, 晓丽 牟, 张雅蓉, 辛小霞, 常青 张, 符文杰

Summary

This research review compared two methods for diagnosing tuberculosis (TB), a deadly lung infection that kills more people worldwide than any other infectious disease. Scientists found that a newer genetic testing method called mNGS was better at detecting TB bacteria than the current standard test, catching 72% of cases versus 64%. Using both tests together was even more effective at 79%, which could help doctors diagnose TB faster and save more lives by starting treatment sooner.

背景:肺结核(Tuberculosis,TB)是全球病死率最高的传染性疾病,需要快速准确的病原学诊断,以便及 时阻断传播并实施早期干预,而目前新型的分子诊断方法在不同的组织中的精确性尚不明确。 方法:本研究通过系统综述,评估了宏基因组下一代测序(metagenomic next-generation sequencing, mNGS)与 Xpert-MTB/RIF 在不同样本类型中的诊断准确性。研究报告遵循 PRISMA-DTA 指南。结果:共纳入 13 项研究,评 估 mNGS 在肺组织、支气管肺泡灌洗液(bronchoalveolar lavage fluid, BALF)及活检标本中的诊断性能。双变量随 机效应荟萃分析显示,mNGS 的总体灵敏度为 72%,高于 Xpert-MTB/RIF(64%);在 BALF 样本中,mNGS 的灵 敏度为 67%,同样高于 Xpert-MTB/RIF(56%)。此外,mNGS 与 Xpert-MTB/RIF 联合检测的灵敏度达到 79%,显 著优于任一方法单独使用(mNGS:72%;Xpert-MTB/RIF:64%)。在肺活检标本中,mNGS 表现出较高的灵敏度 (85%),而 Xpert-MTB/RIF 在该类样本中应用受限。结论:在肺组织和 BALF 样本中,mNGS 的灵敏度显著高于 Xpert-MTB/RIF。mNGS 在肺活检组织中灵敏度达 85%,而 Xpert-MTB/RIF 不适用于此类样本。mNGS 与 Xpert-MTB/RIF 联合检测的灵敏度为 79%,显著优于单一方法。mNGS 对结核病具有较高的诊断效能,尤其在灵敏 度方面表现突出,可作为快速诊断的辅助工具。与现有分子诊断方法相结合,mNGS 将在未来结核病的临床诊断中 发挥重要作用。

Sign in to start a discussion.

More Papers Like This

Meta Analysis Tier 1

Clinical and diagnostic values of metagenomic next-generation sequencing for infection in hematology patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Researchers conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis showing that metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) — a technology that identifies pathogens by reading their DNA — achieves high detection rates for infections in blood cancer patients. The findings suggest mNGS can guide antibiotic decisions and improve patient outcomes, particularly in China where the evidence base is strongest.

Meta Analysis Tier 1

Clinical and diagnostic values of metagenomic next-generation sequencing for infection in hematology patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This meta-analysis of 22 studies found that metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) had a substantially higher pathogen detection rate than conventional microbiological tests in hematology patients, with pooled sensitivity of 87%. The mNGS results led to antibiotic adjustments in about 50% of cases, demonstrating its clinical value for diagnosing infections in immunocompromised patients.

Article Tier 2

Positive Lateral Flow Urine Lipoarabinomannan Assay (LF-LAM) Result in Detection of Active Tuberculosis

The lateral flow urine LAM assay can detect tuberculosis in HIV-co-infected patients even when antibody responses are diminished. This study supports its use as a point-of-care diagnostic, particularly in resource-limited settings.

Article Tier 2

Application of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in the diagnosis of urinary tract infection in patients undergoing cutaneous ureterostomy

Researchers applied metagenomic next-generation sequencing alongside urine culture to diagnose urinary tract infections in patients with cutaneous ureterostomy. The study found that combining these methods provides more comprehensive diagnostic information, and identified specific cytokines and microorganisms as promising biomarkers for building effective diagnostic models for this patient population.

Article Tier 2

Establishing a Microfiber Recovery Rate in Human Lung Tissue

Scientists tested how well they can find tiny plastic fibers in human lung tissue, discovering they only recover about half of some types of fibers during lab testing. This means previous studies may have missed many plastic fibers in our lungs, so we might actually have more of these potentially harmful particles in our bodies than we thought. Getting better at detecting these fibers is important for understanding whether they pose real health risks to people.

Share this paper