Skip to main content

Table 3 The potential pathogen detection rate of mNGS, culture, conventional methods and combined methods in different types of CNS infections

From: Clinical application and evaluation of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in suspected adult central nervous system infection

Detection rateNo history of empirical treatment (%, 95% CI)History of empirical treatment (%, 95% CI)P value between patients treated or not (%, 95% CI)
Detection rate of CNS infections (n = 159)
 mNGS50.00% (20/40)
(34.06–65.94)
34.45% (41/119)a
(26.14–43.79)
0.0802
 Culture25.00% (10/40)
(13.25–41.52)
7.56% (9/119)a
(3.74–14.27)
0.003
 Conventional methods40.00% (16/40)
(25.28–56.61)
18.49% (22/119)a
(12.19–26.87)
0.006
 Combined methods55.00% (22/40)
(38.66–70.40)
39.50% (47/119)
(30.78–48.90)
0.087
Bacterial infections (n = 99)
 mNGS57.14% (16/28)b
(37.43-74.97)
38.03% (27/71)c,d
(27.00–50.36)
0.084
 Culture21.43% (6/28)b
(9.03–41.46)
11.27% (8/71)c
(5.34–21.53)
0.324
 Conventional methods39.29% (11/28)
(22.13–59.27)
15.49% (11/71)d
(8.35–26.46)
0.010
 Combined methods60.71% (17/28)b
(40.73–77.87)
42.25% (30/71)c,d
(30.81–54.54)
0.0976
Viral infections (n = 41)
 mNGS14.29% (1/7)
(0.75–57.99)
23.53% (8/34)
(11.38–41.57)
> 0.9999
 CultureN/AN/AN/A
 Conventional methods0.00% (0/7)
(0.00–43.91)
17.65% (6/34)
(7.39–35.17)
0.567
 Combined methods14.29% (1/7)
(0.75–57.99)
23.53% (8/34)
(11.38–41.57)
0.971
Fungal infections (n = 11)
 mNGS83.33% (5/6)
(36.48–99.12)
60.00% (3/5)
(17.04–92.74)
0.545
 Culture83.33% (5/6)
(36.48–99.12)
20.00% (1/5)
(1.05–70.12)
0.080
 Conventional methods100.00% (6/6)
(51.68–100.00)
60.00% (3/5)
(17.04–92.74)
0.182
 Combined methods100.00% (6/6)
(51.58–100.00)
(46.29-100.00)
100.00% (5/5)
(46.29–100.00)
> 0.9999
Parasitic infections (n = 3)
 mNGSN/A66.7% (2/3)N/A
 CultureN/AN/AN/A
 Conventional methodsN/A66.7% (2/3)N/A
 Combined methodsN/A66.7% (2/3)N/A
  1. Conventional methods-negative: Conventional methods (culture, smear, special antibody, biopsy and PCR) were reported negative or not conducted
  2. Combined methods: mNGS and conventional methods
  3. Statistics methods: Chi-square or Fisher’s exact test as listed
  4. N/A not available
  5. aIn all CNS infections without history of empirical treatment before admission, the detection rate of mNGS was significantly higher than that of culture and conventional methods (p value < 0.0083, adjusted for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni (Dunn) method)
  6. bIn bacterial CNS infection patients without history of empirical treatment before admission, the detection rate of mNGS and combined methods were significantly higher than culture (p value < 0.0083, adjusted for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni (Dunn) method)
  7. cIn bacterial CNS infection patients with history of empirical treatment before admission, the detection rate of mNGS and combined methods were significantly higher than culture (p value < 0.0083, adjusted for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni (Dunn) method)
  8. dIn bacterial CNS infection patients with history of empirical treatment before admission, the detection rate of mNGS and combined methods were significantly higher than conventional methods. (p value < 0.0083, adjusted for multiple comparisons using Bonferroni (Dunn) method)