Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29411191›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology2018

Diagnostic challenges in pyogenic spinal infection: an expanded role for FDG-PET/CT.

Gannon J Yu, Ingrid L Koslowsky, Silvia A Riccio, Angel K M Chu, Harvey R Rabin, Reinhard Kloiber

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Diagnostic performance ofEuropean journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Thoracic spine infection caused byWorld journal of clinical cases · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gannon J YuDepartment of Medicine, Foothills Medical Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Ingrid L KoslowskyDepartment of Radiology, Foothills Medical Centre, University of Calgary, 1403 29 Street NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 2T9, Canada.
Silvia A RiccioDepartment of Radiology, Foothills Medical Centre, University of Calgary, 1403 29 Street NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 2T9, Canada.
Angel K M ChuDepartment of Medicine, Foothills Medical Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada.
Harvey R RabinDepartment of Medicine, Foothills Medical Centre, University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada. rabin@ucalgary.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5590-4643
Reinhard KloiberDepartment of Radiology, Foothills Medical Centre, University of Calgary, 1403 29 Street NW, Calgary, AB, T2N 2T9, Canada. reinhard.kloiber@efwrad.com.
University of Calgary · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In a preliminary investigation of FDG-PET/CT for assessment of therapy response of pyogenic spine infection, it was concluded that activity confined to the margins of a destroyed or degenerated joint with bone-on-bone contact represents nonseptic inflammation, regardless of the intensity of uptake. Only activity in bone, soft tissue, or within the epidural space represents active infection. The purpose of this investigation was to assess the performance of these pattern-based interpretation criteria in a series of problem cases of proven or suspected spine infection. Eighty-two FDG-PET/CTs were done for initial diagnosis because other imaging failed to provide a definitive diagnosis and 147 FDG-PET/CTs were done to assess treatment responses. Pattern-based interpretations were compared with the clinical diagnosis based on bacterial cultures and outcomes after cessation or withholding of antibiotic therapy. Pattern-based interpretation criteria achieved a sensitivity and specificity of 98 and 100%, respectively, for initial diagnosis and a specificity of 100% for assessment of treatment response. The same data was analyzed using intensity of activity as the primary factor. Sensitivity and specificity using the intensity-based criteria were 93 and 68%, respectively, for initial diagnosis, and the specificity of a negative interpretation for therapy response was 55%. Differences from pattern-based criteria are highly significant. Pattern-based criteria perform well in problem cases with equivocal MR and for treatment response because they correctly eliminate activity from nonspecific inflammation associated with destroyed joints with bone-on-bone contact. Response occurs within a timeframe that is useful for managing antibiotic therapy.

Indexed as

Positron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyAnti-Bacterial AgentsBone Diseases, InfectiousFemaleFluorodeoxyglucose F18HumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesROC CurveSpinal DiseasesTreatment OutcomeAnti-Bacterial AgentsFluorodeoxyglucose F18

Identifiers

PMID29411191
OpenAlexW2786934174

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.