ArticleEmergency radiology2021
Role of C-reactive protein in effective utilization of emergent MRI for spinal infections.
Article in Emergency radiology, 2021. 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.
- An Assessment of C-Reactive Protein and Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate in Ruling Out Acute Infectious Spinal Pathology in Emergency Department Patients: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of the American College of Emergency Physicians open · 2025Article
- sCD14-ST and Related Osteoimmunological Biomarkers: A New Diagnostic Approach to Osteomyelitis.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeEmergent spinal MRI is recommended for patients with back pain and red flags for infection. However, many of these studies are negative due to low prevalence of spinal infections. Our purpose was to assess if C-reactive protein (CRP) can be used to guide effective utilization of emergent MRI for spinal infections.
methods316/960 (33%) MRIs performed for infection by the emergency department over 75-month period had CRP levels obtained at presentation, after excluding patients receiving antibiotic or had spinal surgery in < 1 month. An MRI was considered positive when there was imaging evidence of spinal infection confirmed on follow-up by surgery/biopsy/drainage or definitive therapy. A CRP of ≤ 10 mg/L was considered normal and > 100 mg/L as highly elevated.
resultsCRP was normal in 95/316 (30%) and abnormal in 221/316 (70%) patients. MRI was positive in 43/316 (13.6%) patients, all of whom had abnormal CRP. CRP (p < 0.001) and intravenous drug use (IVDU; p = 0.002) were independently associated with a positive MRI. Receiver operator characteristic (ROC) analysis showed AUC of 0.76 for CRP, slightly improving with IVDU. Sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive values for CRP level cut-off: 10 mg/L, 100%, 35%, and 100%, and 100 mg/L, 58%, 70% and 91%, respectively.
conclusionAbnormal CRP, although extremely sensitive, lacks specificity in predicting a positive MRI for spinal infection unless highly elevated. However, a normal CRP (absent recent antibiotic or surgery) makes spinal infection unlikely, and its routine use as a screening test can help reducing utilization of emergent MRI for this purpose.
Indexed as
Identifiers
33449259What 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.