Evidence Hub

Antimicrobial management and infection outcomes of Elizabethkingia spp. co-detection in lower respiratory tract: A real-world mNGS-based observational study

Chen M, Cai Y, Shi Q, Xu A, Tang T, Qian J, Yu S, Zhu H et al.

International journal of infectious diseases : IJID : official publication of the International Society for Infectious Diseases, 2026

105 participants

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Elizabethkingia spp. infections pose a major threat to human health with high mortality. This study aimed to further understand its detection status, co-detection patterns, pathogenicity, and antimicrobial resistance in lower respiratory tract infections (LRTI) through metagenomic high throughput sequencing (mNGS)-based real-world research.

DESIGN AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed 105 LRTI patients positive for Elizabethkingia spp. by mNGS from July 2021 to February 2025. Pathogen profiles, antimicrobial management, and outcomes were reviewed via electronic medical records.

RESULTS: mNGS detection rates for Elizabethkingia spp. in respiratory samples were 21.5% in General Intensive Care Unit (GICU) and 11.1% in Emergency Intensive Care Unit (EICU), more sensitive than culture. Polymicrobial co-detection was ubiquitous (99%), indicating a diverse polymicrobial community. Clinical isolates exhibited variable susceptibility (74%-100%) to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, ciprofloxacin, levofloxacin, doxycycline, minocycline, rifampicin, and azithromycin. Patients receiving targeted antimicrobial therapy based on mNGS indicators (Stringent Map Read Number (SMRN) rank ≤2, normalized SMRN (nSMRN) ≥1000, or SMRN percentage ≥25%) had significantly higher effective treatment rates.

CONCLUSIONS: Elizabethkingia spp. detection rates in ICU respiratory samples are high, frequently complicated by polymicrobial co-detection. Lack of targeted therapy is a key factor in…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 105 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free