Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39640970›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in medicine2024

Investigating the feasibility and effectiveness of bacterial culture in negative pressure wound drainage fluid.

Junjie Wu, Zhengqi Chang

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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. 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

2 authors.

Junjie WuDepartment of Orthopedics, 960th Hospital of PLA, Jinan, China.
Zhengqi ChangDepartment of Orthopedics, 960th Hospital of PLA, Jinan, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Purpose: To analyze the feasibility and effectiveness of bacterial culture in negative pressure wound drainage (NPWD) fluid in patients with Pyogenic Vertebral Osteomyelitis (PVO). Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 17 patients with PVO who were treated with negative pressure drainage at the Department of Orthopedics in our hospital from January 1, 2018 to December 31, 2021. Data was obtained while the patients were in the hospital, including 12 males and 5 females with an average age of 57.71 ± 9.93 years. After applying the negative pressure drainage technique, the drainage fluid was collected and a bacterial culture was performed. The positive rate of bacterial culture in the drainage fluid was recorded. Comparing the positive rate of specimen culture obtained by this surgical method with other methods reported in the literature, the effectiveness of negative pressure drainage in the treatment of PVO was analyzed. Results: All patients were placed with negative pressure sponge during operation and underwent continuous negative pressure aspiration after operation. The average of total drainage volume was 186.47 ± 29.44 mL. The drainage fluid was successfully retained for bacterial culture, and the results of bacterial culture were negative in 3 patients. Pathogenic bacteria were successfully obtained from negative pressure drainage fluid in 14 cases, with a positive rate of 82.4% (14/17). Conclusion: Using negative pressure drainage to retain drainage fluid for bacterial culture can significantly increase the positive rate, which is helpful for the diagnosis of PVO and rational antibiotic treatment.

Indexed as

bacterial culturedrug sensitivity resultnegative pressure drainagepositive ratespinal infection

Identifiers

PMID39640970
PMCPMC11617141

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.