Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2025 Oct 28:15:1611332.
doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2025.1611332. eCollection 2025.

Microbial culture vs. mNGS: diagnostic variations in periprosthetic joint infection

Lan Lin #  1   2   3 , Xiaolin Li #  1   2   3 , Jiayu Li #  1   2   3 , Baijian Wu #  1   2   3 , Yiming Lin  1   2   3 , Wenbo Li  1   2   3 , Hongyan Li  1   2   3 , Yufeng Guo  4 , Chengguo Huang  5 , Zida Huang  1   2   3 , Wenming Zhang  1   2   3 , Xinyu Fang  1   2   3
Affiliations
Comparative Study

Microbial culture vs. mNGS: diagnostic variations in periprosthetic joint infection

Lan Lin et al. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. .

Abstract

Objective: This study aimed to compare the diagnostic performance of conventional microbial culture and metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) in detecting pathogens in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and to identify factors contributing to discrepancies between these two methods.

Methods: A total of 167 patients with suspected PJI (including PJI patients and aseptic failure patients) who underwent revision joint replacement at our center from September 2017 to April 2024 were enrolled. Demographic data, prior antibiotic use, and results of microbial culture and mNGS were documented. Joint fluid, periprosthetic tissue, or prosthetic ultrasonic fluid samples were collected, and at least one sample from each patient underwent both microbial culture and mNGS testing. In the light of the concordance between culture and mNGS results, patients were divided into the detection consistent and detection inconsistent groups. The differences in pathogen detection between the two models were compared, and factors contributing to discordant results were analyzed.

Results: The prior antibiotic use (OR = 2.137, 95% CI = 1.069-4.272, P = 0.032), polymicrobial infections (OR = 3.245, 95% CI = 1.278-8.243, P = 0.013), infection caused by rare pathogens (OR = 2.735, 95% CI = 1.129-6.627, P = 0.026), and intraoperative tissue specimens (OR = 2.837, 95% CI = 1.007-7.994, P = 0.049) were identified as risk factors for discordance between microbial culture and mNGS results, particularly in cases with negative microbial culture but positive mNGS findings. Conversely, consistency in specimen type (OR = 0.471, 95%CI=0.254-0.875, P = 0.017) was identified as a protective factor against discordance.

Conclusion: Clinicians should optimize diagnostic strategies by tailoring microbial culture methods to the patient's clinical condition and integrating mNGS testing where appropriate. It is recommended to use tissue specimens from the same anatomical site across multiple tests while sampling from different regions when necessary. Although this approach may increase costs, it significantly enhances the accuracy of pathogen identification and facilitates more effective treatment.

Keywords: MNGs; microbial culture; pathogen identification; periprosthetic joint infection; risk factors.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
The proportion of microbiological culture and mNGS results in the PJI group and the AF group.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Risk factors for discrepancies between microbial culture and mNGS.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Frequency distribution of microorganisms with different results detected by microbial culture and mNGS.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Abdel M. P., Akgün D., Akin G., Akinola B., Alencar P. (2019). Hip and knee section, diagnosis, pathogen isolation, culture: proceedings of international consensus on orthopedic infections. J. Arthroplasty. 34, S361–s367. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.09.020, PMID: - DOI - PubMed
    1. Amanatullah D., Dennis D., Oltra E. G., Marcelino Gomes L. S., Goodman S. B. (2019). Hip and knee section, diagnosis, definitions: proceedings of international consensus on orthopedic infections. J. Arthroplasty. 34, S329–s337. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.09.044, PMID: - DOI - PubMed
    1. Berbari E. F., Marculescu C., Sia I., Lahr B. D., Hanssen A. D. (2007). Culture-negative prosthetic joint infection. Clin. Infect. Dis. 45, 1113–1119. doi: 10.1086/522184, PMID: - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bozic K. J., Kurtz S. M., Lau E., Ong K., Chiu V. (2010). The epidemiology of revision total knee arthroplasty in the United States. Clin. Orthopaedics. Relat. Res. 468, 45–51. doi: 10.1007/s11999-009-0945-0, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cai Y., Ding H., Chen X., Chen Y., Huang C. (2023). Optimization and standardization of mNGS-based procedures for the diagnosis of Mycoplasma periprosthetic joint infection: A novel diagnostic strategy for rare bacterial periprosthetic joint infection. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 13. doi: 10.3389/fcimb.2023.1089919, PMID: - DOI - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources