Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40560434›Full record

ReviewRadiologie (Heidelberg, Germany)2025

[Spondylitis and spondylodiscitis].

Torsten Diekhoff, Dominik Deppe

Abstract readEnglish AbstractReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Radiologie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2025. 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.

Torsten DiekhoffImmanuel Clinic Ruedersdorf, University Hospital of Brandenburg Medical School, Department of Radiology, Seebad 82/83, 15562, Ruedersdorf bei Berlin, Deutschland. torsten.diekhoff@mhb-fontane.de.
Dominik DeppeDepartment of Radiology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundInflammatory spinal disorders include infectious spondylodiscitis and noninfectious spondyloarthritis. Their clinical differentiation and distinction from degenerative conditions are crucial.

objectiveThis review aims to clearly describe infectious and noninfectious spondylitis, highlighting diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. MATERIALS AND

methodsAnalysis of current literature and clinical experience regarding infection pathways, clinical symptoms, and characteristic findings in imaging modalities (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], computed tomography [CT], X‑ray).

resultsInfectious spondylodiscitis typically arises through hematogenous or iatrogenic routes, predominantly affecting older patients and presenting specific changes detectable by MRI and CT. Noninfectious spondylarthritis, such as axial spondyloarthritis, typically manifests as enthesitis with characteristic structural lesions. MRI is highly sensitive in identifying active inflammatory lesions, while CT and X-ray are advantageous for visualizing chronic structural changes.

conclusionDiagnosing inflammatory spinal disorders remains challenging and requires a combination of clinical and imaging findings. Unified definitions and standardized diagnostic procedures are essential to minimize incorrect assessment and facilitate targeted therapy.

Indexed as

DiscitisMagnetic Resonance ImagingSpondylitisTomography, X-Ray ComputedDiagnosis, DifferentialHumansAxial spondyloarthritisDiagnostic imagingDifferential diagnosisMagnetic resonance imagingSpine

Identifiers

PMID40560434

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.