Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37176498›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2023

Value of Diagnostic Tools in the Diagnosis of Osteomyelitis: Pilot Study to Establish an Osteomyelitis Score.

Roslind K Hackenberg, Fabio Schmitt-Sánchez, Christoph Endler, Verena Tischler, Jayagopi Surendar, Kristian Welle, Koroush Kabir, Frank A Schildberg

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Coaxial electrospun fibers for control release of vancomycin and diclofenac in osteomyelitis management.Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society · 2025
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

8 authors.

Roslind K HackenbergDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany.
Fabio Schmitt-SánchezDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany.
Christoph EndlerDepartment of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-5571-5527
Verena TischlerInstitute of Pathology, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany.
Jayagopi SurendarDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany.
Kristian WelleDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany.
Koroush KabirDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-1458-2825
Frank A SchildbergDepartment of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, University Hospital Bonn, 53127 Bonn, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-0797-1945

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Osteomyelitis (OM) remains one of the most feared complications in bone surgery and trauma. Its diagnosis remains a major challenge due to lack of guidelines. The aim of this study was to prospectively analyze the value of the most common and available diagnostic tools and to establish an OM score to derive treatment recommendations. All patients with suspected OM were included in a prospective pilot study. All patients underwent blood sampling for C-reactive protein and white blood cell count analysis. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and microbiologic and histopathologic samples, were taken from representative sites of initial debridement. All patients were treated according to their OM test results and followed for at least one year. Subsequently, the value of individual or combined diagnostic tools was analyzed in patients with confirmed OM and in patients in whom OM was ruled out. Based on these findings, an OM score was developed that included MRI, microbiology, and histopathology. The score identified all control patients and all but one OM patient, resulting in a correct diagnosis of 93.3%, which was validated in a second independent larger cohort. This was the first study to analyze the value of the most commonly used tools to diagnose OM. The proposed OM score provides a simple scoring system to safely interpret test results with high accuracy.

Indexed as

diagnosticshistologyMRIosteomyelitisscore

Identifiers

PMID37176498
PMCPMC10179525

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.