ArticleInternational journal of spine surgery2021
Surgical Management of Charcot Spinal Arthropathy in the Face of Possible Infection.
Article in International journal of spine surgery, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Charcot spinal arthropathy: a case series.Spinal cord series and cases · 2025Article
- Article
- Infected Charcot Spine Arthropathy Following Spinal Cord Injury.Spine surgery and related research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe design is a retrospective cohort study. Charcot spinal arthropathy (CSA) is a rare and poorly understood progressive destructive spine condition that usually affects patients with preexisting spinal cord injury. The complexity of this condition, especially when additionally burdened by superimposed infection in the CSA zone, can potentially lead to suboptimal management such as protracted antibiotic therapy, predisposition to hardware failure, and pseudarthrosis. While in noninfected CSA primary stabilization is the major goal, staged surgical management has not been stratified based upon presence of a superinfected CSA. We compare clinical and radiological outcomes of surgical treatment in CSA patients with and without concurrent spinal infections.
methodsOur single-institution database was reviewed for all patients diagnosed with CSA and surgically treated, who were subsequently divided into 2 cohorts: spinal arthropathy with superimposed infection and those without. Those were comparatively studied for complications and reoperation rate.
resultsFifteen patients with CSA underwent surgical intervention; mean follow up of 15.3 months (range, 0-43). Eleven patients received stabilization with a quadruple-rod thoracolumbopelvic construct, while 4 patients with superinfected CSA underwent a staged procedure. Patients treated with a staged approach experienced fewer intraoperative complications (0% versus 18%) and fewer revision surgeries (25% versus 36%). Both cohorts had the same eventual healing.
conclusionsSurgical management in CSA patients with primary emphasis on stability and modified surgical treatment based on presence of an active infection in the zone of neuropathic destruction will lead to similar eventual successful results with relatively few and manageable complications in this challenging patient population. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: The proposed treatment algorithm including the use of a quadruple-rod construct with lumbopelivic fixation and a staged approach in patients with superinfected CSA represents a reasonable option in the surgical treatment of CSA.
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.