ReviewActa bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis2020
Diagnostic and interventional management of infective spine diseases.
Review in Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Analysis of the therapeutic efficacy of OLIF combined with posterior percutaneous pedicle screw fixation in the treatment of patients with primary lumbar spondylodiscitis.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Article
- Spondylodiscitis and Its Mimickers: A Pictorial Review.Biomedicines · 2024Review
- MR-guided spine interventions: time to get off the ground?Annals of translational medicine · 2021Article
- Diagnostic performance of DIXON sequences on low-field scanner for the evaluation of knee joint pathology.Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2021Article
- Differentiation between infectious spondylodiscitis versus inflammatory or degenerative spinal changes: How can magnetic resonance imaging help the clinician?La Radiologia medica · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 7 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Spondylodiscitis (SD) is one of the main causes of back pain. Although the low mortality, high morbidity is related to spondilodiscitys, leading spine instability, chronic pain or neurological deficit. Diagnostic imaging plays a primary role in diagnosing spondylodiscitis. However different accuracy is highlighted by different diagnostic tool, depending also on timing of disease which represents a cardinal element for the phenotypic manifestation of the disease, beyond spatial resolution and tissue characterization proper of specific modality imaging. Conventional Radiology (CR), Computed Tomography (CT) and MRI (Magnetic Resonance Imaging) all have proven to be of primary importance in the approach to spondylodiscitis, although magnetic resonance imaging has demonstrated the greatest advantage in identifying the disease from its earliest stages, demonstrating high sensitivity and specificity (92% and 96%, respectively). This review focus on the role of different imaging modality in the approach to the spondylodiscitis, also addressing the role of interventional radiology that is pivotal not only for a diagnosis of certainty through biopsy, but also for a minimally-invasive treatment of paravertebral abscesses spondylodiscitis-related.
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.