Division of Public Health, Infectious Diseases and Occupational Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine and Science, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA.
Citations 3
What Is the Accuracy of 16S PCR Followed by Sanger Sequencing or Next-generation Sequencing in Native Vertebral Osteomyelitis? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis
Background Identifying a microorganism in patients with native vertebral osteomyelitis presents diagnostic challenges. Microorganism identification through culture-based methods is constrained by prolonged processing times and sensitivity limitations. Despite the availability of molecular diagnostic techniques for identifying microorganisms in native vertebral osteomyelitis, there is considerable variability in reported sensitivity and specificity across studies, leading to uncertainty in their clinical utility. Questions/purposes What are the sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratios for 16S broad-range PCR followed by Sanger sequencing (16S) and metagenomic next-generation sequencing (NGS) for detecting bacteria in native vertebral osteomyelitis? Methods On June 29, 2023, we searched Cochrane, Embase, Medline, and Scopus for results from January 1970 to June 2023. Included studies involved adult patients with suspected native vertebral osteomyelitis undergoing molecular diagnostics—16S bacterial broad-range PCR followed by Sanger sequencing and shotgun or targeted metagenomic NGS—for bacteria detection. Studies involving nonnative vertebral osteomyelitis and cases of brucellar, tubercular, or fungal etiology were excluded. The reference standard for the diagnosis of native vertebral osteomyelitis was a composite clinical- and investigator-defined native vertebral osteomyelitis diagnosis. Diagnostic performance was assessed using a bivariate random-effects model. Risk of bias and diagnostic applicability were evaluated using the revised Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS-2) tool. After a manual screening of 3403 studies, 10 studies (5 on 16S, 5 on NGS) were included in the present analysis, from which 391 patients were included from a total of 958 patients overall. Quality assessment via QUADAS-2 criteria showed moderate risk of bias and good applicability. Results 16S showed 78% (95% confidence interval [CI] 95% CI 31% to 96%) sensitivity and 94% (95% CI 73% to 99%) specificity, whereas NGS demonstrated 82% (95% CI 63% to 93%) sensitivity and 71% (95% CI 37% to 91%) specificity. In addition, the diagnostic ORs were 59 (95% CI 9 to 388) and 11 (95% CI 4 to 35) for 16S and NGS, respectively. Summary receiver operating characteristic curves showed high test performance for 16S (area under the curve for 16S 95% [95% CI 93% to 97%] and for NGS 89% [95% CI 86% to 92%]). Certainty in estimates was moderate because of sample size limitations. Conclusion This meta-analysis found moderate-to-high diagnostic performance of molecular methods on direct patient specimens for the diagnosis of native vertebral osteomyelitis. When used as a complementary test to microbiological analyses, a positive 16S result rules in the diagnosis of native vertebral osteomyelitis, while further studies are needed to understand the role of NGS in the diagnosis of native vertebral osteomyelitis. When available, these tests should be used in addition to conventional microbiology, especially in complex cases with extensively negative standard microbiological test results, to detect fastidious bacteria or to confirm the causative bacteria when their isolation and pathogenicity are unclear. A large sample size is needed in future research to understand the use of these techniques as standalone tests for diagnosis. Level of Evidence Level III, diagnostic study.
Culture-Negative Native Vertebral Osteomyelitis: A Narrative Review of an Underdescribed Condition
The incidence of culture-negative NVO (CN-NVO) cases is increasing, presenting significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges due to the inability to isolate causative organisms with conventional microbiological methods. Factors influencing the diagnosis of CN-NVO include prior antimicrobial therapy, low pathogen burden, fastidious or intracellular organisms, technical issues, and non-infectious mimickers. Diagnosis often relies on imaging modalities like magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomography (CT)-guided biopsy, though these methods can sometimes fail to yield positive microbiological results. Advanced diagnostic tools, such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR), metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS), and cell-free DNA analysis, may be necessary to identify the pathogen. The causative pathogen cannot be isolated in some patients, among which an empirical antimicrobial therapy should be initiated. This narrative review discusses the management, monitoring, surgical indications, and outcomes for patients with CN-NVO.
Plasma Microbial Cell-free DNA Next-generation Sequencing Can Be a Useful Diagnostic Tool in Patients With Osteoarticular Infections
Abstract Background Recent advances in shotgun metagenomic sequencing (sMGS) for detecting microbial cell-free DNA (mcfDNA) in peripheral blood have shown promise across various patient populations. This study evaluates the application of sMGS for diagnosing osteoarticular infections (OAIs), a condition with significant diagnostic challenges. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis on 73 patients suspected of OAIs at the Mayo Clinic from 2019 to 2023, incorporating mcfDNA sMGS (Karius test [KT]) into their diagnostic evaluation. We categorized the clinical impact of KT on OAI diagnoses and management into 4 distinct outcomes. (1) KT was able to confirm an established diagnosis, (2) KT supported noninfectious diseases diagnosis, (3) KT established an unsuspected diagnosis, (4) KT did not add relevant information. Results In our cohort, KT was performed in 73 patients. Among the infected individuals, KT yielded positive results in 22 of 43 (51.2%) cases. Of these 22 cases, 11 (50%) showed agreement with conventional diagnostic workup, whereas in 5 (22.7%) cases, the KT established an unsuspected diagnosis. Native vertebral osteomyelitis diagnosis (P < .001) or OAIs with concomitant presence of endocarditis or endovascular infection (P = .005) were statistically associated with a definite, probable, or possible diagnostic certainty of KT result. Conclusions In complex OAIs, KT enhanced diagnostic accuracy by 11.6%, proving especially beneficial in diagnosing native vertebral osteomyelitis and infections with concurrent endocarditis or endovascular complications. Our findings underscore the utility of KT in the diagnostic workflow for challenging OAI cases, potentially altering clinical management for a significant subset of patients.