Observational studyEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2021
Diagnostic performance of suction drainage fluid culture for acute surgical site infection after aseptic instrumented spine surgery: a retrospective analysis of 363 cases.
Observational study in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Diagnostic Value of Blood Next-Generation Sequencing in Early Surgical Site Infection After Spine Surgery.International journal of general medicine · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAnalyze the diagnostic performance of suction drainage fluid culture for acute surgical site infection, which has not been specifically reported in spine surgery patients.
methodThis was a retrospective single-center observational study including data from 363 patients who underwent aseptic instrumented spine surgery between 2015 and 2017. A suction drain was inserted in all cases. Data analyzed were patient age, gender, ASA score, indication for surgery (degenerative disease, tumor, trauma), spine level (cervical, thoracic, lumbar), procedure performed and spine level, operative time, body temperature, postoperative C-reactive protein time-curve, clinical aspect of surgical scar, bacteriology results of suction drainage fluid, and in case of revision surgery, lavage fluid. Major criteria for periprosthetic infection proposed by the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) were accepted as the gold standard for the diagnosis of acute surgical site infection.
resultsThe overall rate of surgical site infection was 6.9% (5.76% for 1- or 2-level fusion, 5.81% for 3- or 4-level fusion, and 15.6% for 5-level fusion and above). The suction drain was withdrawn on the second postoperative day in 44.1% of cases and the third day in 39.1%. The sensitivity of suction drainage fluid culture for the diagnosis of surgical site infection was 20% [95%CI 6.8-40.7%] with a 96.2% [95%CI 93.2-97.9] specificity.
conclusionThe diagnostic performance of suction drainage fluid culture after aseptic instrumented spine surgery for acute surgical site infection is insufficient to warrant its use in routine practice.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.