ArticleEmergency radiology2018
Emergent spinal MRI in IVDU patients presenting with back pain: do we need an MRI in every case?
Article in Emergency radiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Postoperative spinal cord infarction on a gravid woman with suspected IV drug use: a case report.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSpinal MRI is the exam of choice for the workup of patients with suspected spinal infection. In this retrospective study, we assess the value of obtaining contrast-enhanced spinal MRI for patients presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute back pain and a history of intravenous drug use (IVDU).
methodsA retrospective IRB-approved, HIPAA compliant review of the imaging findings, reports and electronic charts of 167 consecutive IV drug-using patients (M/F = 96:71, mean age = 40 years) that presented to the ED with acute back pain over a 55-month period and underwent contrast-enhanced spinal MRI within 24 h. Fisher's exact test was used to identify statistically significant (p < 0.05) associations with MRI findings.
resultsEvidence of infectious spondylitis was demonstrated on the spinal MRIs of 39.5% (n = 66) of 167 patients, all of whom were admitted, and nearly half (48.5%; 32/66) underwent surgical or percutaneous intervention. Statistically significant differences in the decision to admit, blood cultures, and the type of treatment was demonstrated in patients with findings of spinal infection on MRI (p < 0.05).
conclusionUse of emergent spinal MRI in the workup of IVDU patients with acute back pain is justified despite the resultant pressure on MRI scanner, technologist, and interpretation time.
Indexed as
Identifiers
29299700What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.