Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35211807›Full record

SynthesisEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2022

Endoscopic treatment of spondylodiscitis: systematic review.

Pedro Gonçalo Pereira Abreu, José Artur Lourenço, Clara Romero, Gonçalo Neto D Almeida, Lia Pappamikail, Maria Fátima Lopes, Miguel Brito, Pedro Teles, Joaquim Pedro Correia

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 22 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Advances and Challenges of Endoscopic Spine Surgery.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024
    Review
  15. Article
  16. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Pedro Gonçalo Pereira AbreuNeurosurgery Department - Serviço de Neurocirurgia, Centro Hospitalar Universitário Do Algarve, Rua Leão Penedo, 8000-386, Faro, Portugal. pabreu@chalgarve.min-saude.pt.ORCID 0000-0002-3804-8427
José Artur LourençoNeurosurgery Department - Serviço de Neurocirurgia, Centro Hospitalar Universitário Do Algarve, Rua Leão Penedo, 8000-386, Faro, Portugal.
Clara RomeroNeurosurgery Department - Serviço de Neurocirurgia, Centro Hospitalar Universitário Do Algarve, Rua Leão Penedo, 8000-386, Faro, Portugal.
Gonçalo Neto D AlmeidaNeurosurgery Department - Serviço de Neurocirurgia, Centro Hospitalar Universitário Do Algarve, Rua Leão Penedo, 8000-386, Faro, Portugal.
Lia PappamikailNeurosurgery Department - Serviço de Neurocirurgia, Centro Hospitalar Universitário Do Algarve, Rua Leão Penedo, 8000-386, Faro, Portugal.
Maria Fátima LopesNeurosurgery Department - Serviço de Neurocirurgia, Centro Hospitalar Universitário Do Algarve, Rua Leão Penedo, 8000-386, Faro, Portugal.
Miguel BritoNeurosurgery Department - Serviço de Neurocirurgia, Centro Hospitalar Universitário Do Algarve, Rua Leão Penedo, 8000-386, Faro, Portugal.
Pedro TelesNeurosurgery Department - Serviço de Neurocirurgia, Centro Hospitalar Universitário Do Algarve, Rua Leão Penedo, 8000-386, Faro, Portugal.
Joaquim Pedro CorreiaNeurosurgery Department - Serviço de Neurocirurgia, Centro Hospitalar Universitário Do Algarve, Rua Leão Penedo, 8000-386, Faro, Portugal.
Algarve Biomedical Center · PT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSpondylodiscitis is a severe condition where standalone antibiotic therapy resolves most cases. In refractory infections, open surgery may aid with infection debulking. However, significant morbidity can occur. Nowadays, endoscopic approaches are emerging as an alternative. However, until now, only small-scale studies exist. Being so, we carried the first systematic review on spondylodiscitis endoscopic debridement indications, technique details, and outcomes.

methodsSearch for all English written original studies approaching the spondylodiscitis endoscopic treatment was performed using PubMed and EBSCO host. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed, and a pre-specified protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42020183657).

resultsFourteen studies involving 342 participants were included for analysis. Data overall quality was fair. Indications for the endoscopic approach were poorly defined. The most consensual indication was refractory infection to conservative treatment. Spinal instability or neurological deficits were common exclusion criteria. All authors described similar techniques, and despite the frequent severe co-morbidities, procedure morbidity was low. Re-interventions were common. Microorganism identification varied from 54.2 to 90.4%. Treatment failure among studies ranged from 0 to 33%. Pain, functional status, and neurological deficits had satisfactory improvement after procedures.

conclusionsThe endoscopic debridement of spondylodiscitis seems to be an effective and safe approach for refractory spondylodiscitis. A novel approach with initial endoscopic infection debulking and antibiotic therapy could improve the success of spondylodiscitis treatment.

Indexed as

DiscitisSpinal DiseasesAnti-Bacterial AgentsDebridementEndoscopyHumansLumbar VertebraeRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAnti-Bacterial AgentsDiscitisEndoscopic treatmentSpondylitisSpondylodiscitis

Identifiers

PMID35211807
OpenAlexW4214532293

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.