ArticleMicroorganisms2022
Distinguishing
Article in Microorganisms, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Discriminating Osteoarticular Infection Bacterial Aetiology Using Immune-Inflammatory Biomarkers.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Decision-making after joint aspiration: C-reactive protein and synovial white blood cell count as laboratory indicators for surgical joint lavage in pediatric septic arthritis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Clinical Characteristics and Follow-Up of Children with Primary Haematogenous Osteomyelitis and Septic Arthritis: Eight Years of Experience from Hungary.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Osteoarticular Infections in Children: Accurately Distinguishing between MSSA and Kingella kingaeMicroorganisms · 2022Article
- Article
- Minimally invasive management of pediatric osteoarticular infections.Frontiers in pediatrics · 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
9 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1) Background: We aim to identify clinical and laboratorial parameters to distinguish Kingella kingae from pyogenic septic arthritis (SA). (2) Methods: A longitudinal, observational, single-centre study of children < 5 years old with microbiological positive SA admitted to a paediatric hospital from 2013−2020 was performed. Clinical and laboratorial data at admission and at 48 h, as well as on treatment and evolution, were obtained. (3) Results: We found a total of 75 children, 44 with K. kingae and 31 with pyogenic infections (mostly MSSA, S. pneumoniae and S. pyogenes). K. kingae affected younger children with low or absent fever, low inflammatory markers and a favourable prognosis. In the univariate analyses, fever, septic look, CRP and ESR at admission and CRP at 48 h were significantly lower in K. kingae SA. In the multivariate analyses, age > 6 months ≤ 2 years, apyrexy and CRP ≤ 100 mg/L were significative, with an overall predictive positive value of 86.5%, and 88.4% for K. kingae. For this model, ROC curves were capable of differentiating (AUC 0.861, 95% CI 0.767−0.955) K. kingae SA from typical pathogens. (4) Conclusions: Age > 6 months ≤ 2 years, apyrexy and PCR ≤ 100 mg/L were the main predictive factors to distinguish K. kingae from pyogenic SA < 5 years. These data need to be validated in a larger study.
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.