Abstract
Traditional pathogenic diagnosis presents defects such as a low positivity rate, inability to identify uncultured microorganisms, and time-consuming nature. Clinical metagenomics next-generation sequencing can be used to detect any pathogen, compensating for the shortcomings of traditional pathogenic diagnosis. We report third-generation long-read sequencing results and second-generation short-read sequencing results for ascitic fluid from a patient with liver ascites and compared the two types of sequencing results with the results of traditional clinical microbial culture. The distribution of pathogenic microbial species revealed by the two types of sequencing results was quite different, and the third-generation sequencing results were consistent with the results of traditional microbial culture, which can effectively guide subsequent treatment. Short reads, the lack of amplification, and enrichment to amplify signals from trace pathogens, and host background noise may be the reasons for the high error in the second-generation short-read sequencing results. Therefore, we propose that long-read-based rRNA analysis technology is superior to the short-read shotgun-based metagenomics method in the identification of pathogenic bacteria.