MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417529141 · doi:10.1016/j.xnsj.2025.100840

The diagnostic value of metagenomic next-generation sequencing versus traditional microbiological testing in native pyogenic spinal infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2025· article· en· W4417529141 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Othman Ibrahim, Rewa Aboushaala, Andrew Savoia, S J Ward, Gregory D. Lopez, Sarah E. Sansom, Brett Williams, Kern Singh, Lena Al‐Harthi, Khaled Aboushaala

Bibliographic record

VenueNorth American Spine Society Journal (NASSJ) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInfectious Diseases and Tuberculosis
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRush University
KeywordsMetagenomicsValue (mathematics)Microbiological TechniquesPathogenIdentification (biology)AntimicrobialSystematic error

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Native pyogenic spinal infections (PSIs), including spondylodiscitis and vertebral osteomyelitis, are challenging to diagnose due to low culture sensitivity and delayed results. Metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) has emerged as a promising diagnostic tool, but its comparative clinical utility remains uncertain. The purpose of this study is to systematically compare the diagnostic performance and clinical impact of mNGS versus conventional microbial culture in detecting pathogens responsible for native PSIs. Methods: The current systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. A comprehensive literature search was performed across 6 major databases. Eligible studies directly compared mNGS with standard culture for native PSIs and reported diagnostic performance metrics. Data were extracted and analyzed using a random-effects model to produce pooled estimates. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Primary outcomes included pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Secondary outcomes assessed diagnostic yield, time to diagnosis, treatment modification, and false-positive or contamination events. Results: A total of 1,227 patients from 12 studies were included, encompassing those with suspected or confirmed native PSIs. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of mNGS were 89.7% (95% CI: 85.6-93.1%) and 86.2% (95% CI: 80.5-91.0%), respectively. mNGS demonstrated a significantly higher diagnostic yield (69-90%) compared to culture (27.2-44.7%) and enabled faster diagnosis (range, 17.7-48 hours). mNGS informed antimicrobial selection in up to 70.3% of cases and detected a broader pathogen spectrum. The incidence of false positives was low (range, 1-5) but non-negligible, emphasizing the need for careful interpretation. Conclusions: mNGS outperforms conventional culture in sensitivity, speed, and breadth of pathogen detection in native PSIs and supports more tailored antimicrobial therapy. However, careful interpretation is necessary due to potential false positives. These findings support the integration of mNGS into clinical workflows, particularly in complex or culture-negative infections.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: Meta-analysis
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.088
Threshold uncertainty score0.581

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.105
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNorth American Spine Society Journal (NASSJ)Same topicInfectious Diseases and TuberculosisFrench-language works237,207