Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38590972›Full record

ReviewNorth American Spine Society journal2024

Presentation and management of infection in total disc replacement: A review.

Hannah Spece, Armen Khachatryan, Frank M Phillips, Todd H Lanman, Gunnar B J Andersson, Grant E Garrigues, Hyun Bae, Joshua J Jacobs, Steven M Kurtz

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in North American Spine Society journal, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Cervical disk arthroplasty: The new gold standard?Bulletin of the Hospital for Joint Disease (2013) · 2025
    Review
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.

Hannah SpeceDrexel University Implant Research Core, 3401 Market St., Suite 345, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.
Armen KhachatryanThe Disc Replacement Center, 3584 W 9000 S Suite 209, Salt Lake City, UT 84088, USA.
Frank M PhillipsDivision of Spine Surgery, Rush University Medical Center, 1611 W Harrison St. #400, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
Todd H LanmanLanman Spinal Neurosurgery, 450 N Roxbury Dr., 3rd Floor, Beverly Hills, CA 90210, USA.
Gunnar B J AnderssonDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Rush University, 1611 W Harrison St., Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
Grant E GarriguesDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Rush University, 1611 W Harrison St., Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
Hyun BaeCedars-Sinai Spine Center, 444 S San Vicente Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90048, USA.
Joshua J JacobsDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery, Rush University, 1611 W Harrison St., Chicago, IL 60612, USA.
Steven M KurtzDrexel University Implant Research Core, 3401 Market St., Suite 345, Philadelphia, PA, 19104, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Total disc replacement (TDR) is widely used in the treatment of cervical and lumbar spine pathologies. Although TDR infection, particularly delayed infection, is uncommon, the results can be devastating, and consensus on clinical management remains elusive. In this review of the literature, we asked: (1) What are the reported rates of TDR infection; (2) What are the clinical characteristics of TDR infection; and (3) How has infection been managed for TDR patients? Methods: We performed a search of the literature using PubMed and Embase to identify studies that reported TDR infection rates, the identification and management of TDR infection, or TDR failures with positive cultures. Twenty database studies (17 focusing on the cervical spine and 3 on the lumbar spine) and 10 case reports representing 15 patients were reviewed along with device Summary of Safety and Effectiveness Data reports. Results: We found a lack of clarity regarding how infection was diagnosed, indicating a variation in clinical approach and highlighting the need for a standard definition of TDR infection. Furthermore, while reported infection rates were low, the absence of a clear definition prevented robust data analysis and may contribute to underreporting in the literature. We found that treatment strategy and success rely on several factors including patient symptoms and time to onset, microorganism type, and implant positioning/stability. Conclusions: Although treatment strategies varied throughout the extant literature, common practices in eliminating infection and reconstructing the spine emerged. The results will inform future work on the creation of a more robust definition of TDR infection and as well as recommendations for management.

Indexed as

BacteriaCervical spineImagingInfectionLumbar spineTotal disc replacement (TDR)

Identifiers

PMID38590972
PMCPMC10999484

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.