Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33447687›Full record

ReviewJournal of spine surgery (Hong Kong)2020

Future directions of postoperative spinal implant infections.

Max Jägersberg, Susanne Feihl, Florian Ringel

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of spine surgery (Hong Kong), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Spinal infections.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026
    Review
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

3 authors.

Max JägersbergDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany.
Susanne FeihlDepartment of Medical Microbiology, Immunology and Hygiene, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany.
Florian RingelDepartment of Neurosurgery, University Medical Center Mainz, Mainz, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This article outlines some promising future concepts against postoperative spinal implant infections on the basis of today available literature. The ever-adapting bacteria causing this common complication compel a corresponding continuous research about best effective treatment. The aim is to give a perspective on several future attack-points: surgical infection prevention strategies such as technical optimization of implants and surgical technique; faster diagnostic tools to detect infection, especially in the context of late infections with low-virulent germs and with regard to decision-making in the course of the surgical workflow; and combined surgical and medical treatment options against implant infections. The surgical treatment section will also state open issues concerning implant removal, and the medical treatment section will give an outlook to promising medical alternatives in a post-antibiotic era. To keep up in this field will be important to retain spine surgery in the future as the state-of-the-art treatment option for mandatory spinal interventions in the presence of tumor or trauma and even more so as an attractive option for patients with degenerative spinal disorder for improvement of their life quality.

Indexed as

alpha defensin testbacteriophagesbiofilmcoatedImplant infectionsimplant processingimplant removallate infectionsno-touch techniquepost-antibiotic eraprevention

Identifiers

PMID33447687
PMCPMC7797804

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.