SynthesisFrontiers in surgery2025
Efficacy of spinal fusion in Brucella spondylitis: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Frontiers in surgery, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Analysis of Risk Factors for Postoperative Complications of Thoracolumbar Brucella Spondylitis.Infection and drug resistance · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Brucellosis affects more than 500,000 people worldwide each year, and brucellosis spondylitis is one of its most common complications, accounting for about 2-53 percent of cases. Purpose: The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature on the outcome of spinal fusion in patients with Borrelia burgdorferi spondylitis. Study design: Systematic review. Methods: Seventeen studies including 746 patients treated with minimally invasive and/or open spinal fusion were reviewed. Patients with this pathologic spondylolisthesis showed significant improvement in clinical and functional scores and high satisfaction after spinal fusion. The overall fusion rate was 99%, the excellent fusion rate was 90%, and all patients with fusion devices placed achieved fusion. The Oswestry disability index scores decreased from 62.11 (35.72-88.5) preoperatively to 7.22 (4.0-10.44) postoperatively, the Japanese Orthopaedic Association scores improved from 15.13 (range, 10.47-19.79) preoperatively to 22.17 (16.4-27.93) postoperatively, and the The visual analog scale scores improved from 6.95 (4.5-9.4) to 1.33 (0-2.66) postoperatively, Erythrocyte sedimentation rate from 49.95 (35.5-64.4) preoperatively to 8.17 (4.13-12.2) postoperatively, and C-reactive protein from 41.25 (20.3-62.2) preoperatively to 4.48 (1.25-12.2) postoperatively. In addition, all patients showed varying degrees of neurological improvement, with a probability of complete return to normal neurological symptoms of 88.79%. Spinal deformities also improved significantly. Conclusion: Spinal fusion can achieve a high clinical success rate and has a favourable prognosis and pain relief in patients with Brucella spondylitis. Although patients with Brucella spondylitis have a number of high-risk factors affecting the outcome of fusion, in conjunction with medication and debridement, spinal fusion may be a good option with significant functional and clinical improvement.
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.