ArticleMicroorganisms2025
Assessment of Sonication for Diagnosing Implant-Associated Infections in Spinal Surgery Routine Practice.
Article in Microorganisms, 2025. 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.
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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Infections following spinal surgery can result in potentially devastating complications. An accurate microbiological diagnosis is crucial for proper treatment. Sonication is a diagnostic method that can be beneficial in patients with acute or low-grade infections. This study aimed to assess the sensitivity and effectiveness of sonication as a method for diagnosing spinal implant infections in cases of both suspected and unsuspected infections during spinal surgical revision. We conducted a retrospective observational study that included all patients who underwent revision spinal surgery between March 2011 and October 2022. We collected the implants and surrounding tissues from these patients for microbiological analysis. The implant sonication was performed according to a previously published protocol. Patients were categorised into those undergoing surgical revision for suspected spinal implant infection (SSII) and those for non-suspected spinal implant infection (NSSII). We collected comprehensive patient data, including demographics, risk factors, Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI), surgical details, microbiological findings, antibiotic regimens, and clinical outcomes. Sensitivity and specificity analyses were conducted on both sonicated and non-sonicated samples. A total of 158 patients met the inclusion criteria; 51 of them were diagnosed with infection during surgery revision. Patients with SSII had higher CCIs than those with NSSII. The sensitivity was significantly higher in sonicated samples (68.6%; 95% CI: 55.9-81.4%) than in non-sonicated samples (42%; 95% CI: 28.3-55.7%). The specificities were similar, with sonicated samples at 93.5% (95% CI: 88.8-98.1%) and non-sonicated samples at 99.05% (95% CI: 97.2-100.9%). Combining both methods resulted in sensitivity and specificity rates of 76% (95% CI: 64.2-87.8%) and 93.3% (95% CI: 88.2-98.1%), respectively. Methicillin-susceptible
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.