ArticleCureus2024
Evaluating the Efficacy of Antibiotic Therapy in Non-responsive Sacroiliitis: A Comparative Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSacroiliitis, characterized by inflammation of the sacroiliac joints, poses significant challenges in management, especially in patients unresponsive to standard therapies like non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and physical therapy. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of antibiotic therapy in such patients, addressing a critical gap in the current treatment approach.
methodsA total of 360 patients with lower back pain who presented to the outpatient department (OPD) of the Department of Orthopedics of a medical college in Northern India for six months were included in this study. With meticulous history taking, clinical examination, and radiological evaluation, 59 patients were diagnosed with sacroiliitis, out of which 31 were males and 28 were females, aged between 20 and 40 years, and were enrolled in this cross-sectional comparative study. Patients were divided into two groups: a control group (21 patients) receiving conventional treatment without antibiotics and a study group (38 patients) receiving conventional treatment plus antibiotics (who gave consent for treatment with antibiotics). The primary outcome was assessed using the Japanese Orthopaedic Association (JOA) score, with evaluations conducted at baseline, one month, and three months. Recovery rates were also calculated. SPSS trial software version 27 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY) was used for statistical analysis.
resultsBoth groups exhibited improvement in JOA scores over time. At the one-month and three-month follow-ups, the mean JOA scores and recovery rates showed no statistically significant difference between the control and study groups (p-values > 0.05). Adverse effects related to antibiotic use were not significant.
conclusionThe study concludes that the addition of antibiotics to the conventional treatment regimen for sacroiliitis does not provide significant benefit in terms of functional recovery or pain relief in patients non-responsive to NSAIDs and/or physical therapy. These findings underscore the importance of a targeted treatment approach based on the specific etiology of sacroiliitis and caution against unnecessary antibiotic use.
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.