Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35000347›Full record

ArticleNeurospine2021

Percutaneous Endoscopic Interbody Debridement and Fusion for Pyogenic Lumbar Spondylodiskitis: Surgical Technique and the Comparison With Percutaneous Endoscopic Drainage and Debridement.

Po-Ju Lai, Sheng-Fen Wang, Tsung-Ting Tsai, Yun-Da Li, Ping-Yeh Chiu, Ming-Kai Hsieh, Fu-Cheng Kao

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurospine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.3field-weighted citation impact, top 20% of its field
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Minimally Invasive versus Traditional Surgery: Efficacy of PELD and PLIF in Treating Pyogenic Spondylodiscitis.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2024
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
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

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Po-Ju LaiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Section, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Sheng-Fen WangDepartment of Anesthesiology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, College of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Tsung-Ting TsaiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Section, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Yun-Da LiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Section, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Ping-Yeh ChiuDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Section, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Ming-Kai HsiehDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Section, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Fu-Cheng KaoDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Spine Section, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital and Chang Gung University College of Medicine, Taoyuan, Taiwan.
Chang Gung University · TW

Funding

Chang Gung Memorial Hospital CMRPG3K0631
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveSurgical treatment of severe infectious spondylodiskitis remains challenging. Although minimally invasive percutaneous endoscopic drainage and debridement (PEDD) may yield good results in complicated cases, outcomes of patients with extensive structural damage and mechanical instability may be unsatisfactory. To address severe infectious spondylodiskitis, we have developed a surgical technique called percutaneous endoscopic interbody debridement and fusion (PEIDF), which comprises endoscopic debridement, bonegraft interbody fusion, and percutaneous posterior instrumentation.

methodsOutcomes of PEIDF in 12 patients and PEDD in 15 patients with infectious spondylodiskitis from April 2014 to July 2018 were reviewed retrospectively. Outcome were compared between 2 kinds of surgical procedures.

resultsPatients in PEIDF group had significantly lower rate of revision surgery (8.3% vs. 58.3%), better kyphosis angle (-5.73° ± 8.74 vs. 1.07° ± 2.70 in postoperative; 7.09° ± 7.23 vs. 0.79° ± 4.08 in kyphosis correction at 1 year), and higher fusion rate (83.3% vs. 46.7%) than those who received PEDD.

conclusionPEIDF is an effective approach for treating infectious spondylodiskitis, especially in patients with spinal instability and multiple medical comorbidities.

Indexed as

Infectious spondylodiskitisKyphosisPercutaneous endoscopic debridementSpine instability

Identifiers

PMID35000347
PMCPMC8752711
OpenAlexW4200378936

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.