The Application of Next-Generation Sequencing in Preoperative Evaluation for Urologic Stone Surgery
Issued Date
2024-01-01
Resource Type
ISSN
08927790
eISSN
1557900X
Scopus ID
2-s2.0-85196940443
Pubmed ID
38874261
Journal Title
Journal of Endourology
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Journal of Endourology (2024)
Suggested Citation
Jongjitaree K., Sheetz T., Finegan J., Bechis S.K., Sur R.L., Monga M. The Application of Next-Generation Sequencing in Preoperative Evaluation for Urologic Stone Surgery. Journal of Endourology (2024). doi:10.1089/end.2024.0167 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/99365
Title
The Application of Next-Generation Sequencing in Preoperative Evaluation for Urologic Stone Surgery
Author(s)
Author's Affiliation
Corresponding Author(s)
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
Introduction: Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a new molecular technique for identifying microorganisms. Treating bacteriuria in patients undergoing stone removal procedures is important for preventing postoperative urinary tract infection (UTI). The objective of this study is to assess the usefulness of preoperative urine NGS testing by comparing NGS with standard urine culture in predicting postoperative UTI after ureteroscopic lithotripsy (URSL) and percutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL). Materials and Methods: This prospective study was conducted from February 16, 2022, to January 11, 2024. Sixty subjects who underwent URSL or PCNL were included. Preoperative voided urine samples were collected for urine culture and tested by MicroGenDX for urine polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and urine NGS. Stone specimens obtained intraoperatively were also sent for stone culture and MicrogenDx. Patients were monitored for 4 weeks post-operation for recording clinical outcomes related to infections and complications. Results: Twenty-six (43.3%) male and 34 (56.7%) female participants were included. Twenty-six (43.3%) patients underwent PCNL (15 standard PCNL and 11 mini PCNL), and 34 (56.7%) underwent URSL. Standard urine culture identified positive results in 26 cases (43.3%), PCR for 17 cases (28.3%), and NGS for 31 cases (51.7%). The overall postoperative UTI rate was 6 (10%). Standard urine culture demonstrated a sensitivity of 50%, specificity of 57.4%, and accuracy of 56.7%. Positive predictive value (PPV) was notably poor at 11.5%. Urine NGS showed a higher sensitivity of 83.3%, specificity of 53.7%, accuracy of 55%, and PPV of 16.7%. Conclusion: Urine NGS significantly improves the sensitivity of detecting microorganisms in preoperative urine compared with standard urine culture. Despite its high sensitivity and capability to identify nonculturable bacteria, using NGS alongside standard urine culture is recommended. This parallel approach harnesses the strengths of both methods. Integrating NGS into standard practice could elevate the quality of care, especially for patients at high risk of UTIs, such as those undergoing invasive stone removal procedures.