Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40903677›Full record

ReviewEuropean spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society2025

Infectious sacroiliitis: insights from long-term follow-up and the diagnostic contribution of computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging.

Wiem Feki, Amal Chakroun, Amina Kammoun, Fatma Hammami, Khaoula Rekik, Zeineb Mnif, Makram Koubaa, Mounir Ben Jemaa

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European spine journal : official publication of the European Spine Society, the European Spinal Deformity Society, and the European Section of the Cervical Spine Research Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

8 authors.

Wiem FekiUniversity of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Amal ChakrounUniversity of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia. amal.chakroun@medecinesfax.org.
Amina KammounUniversity of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Fatma HammamiUniversity of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Khaoula RekikUniversity of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Zeineb MnifUniversity of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Makram KoubaaUniversity of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.
Mounir Ben JemaaUniversity of Sfax, Sfax, Tunisia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeInfectious sacroiliitis (ISI) is a rare condition with non-specific symptoms, often leading to delayed diagnosis We aim to describe the clinical, microbiological, and radiological characteristics of infectious sacroiliitis (ISI), and to highlight the diagnostic and follow-up value of imaging modalities. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a retrospective review of 35 ISI cases diagnosed over 27 years. Clinical, microbiological, and imaging data were collected. CT and MRI findings were compared, and follow-up imaging was analyzed when available.

resultsThe mean age was 40.9 years, with a female predominance (60%). Pyogenic organisms were identified in 45.7% of cases, Mycobacterium tuberculosis in 34.3%, and Brucella spp. in 20%. The average diagnostic delay was 102 days. The most frequent symptoms were fever (80%) and buttock pain (77.1%), and inflammatory markers were elevated in approximately 90% of cases. Blood cultures were positive in 6.4%, while biopsy and abscess aspiration confirmed the etiological diagnosis in 28.6% and 14.3%, respectively. Imaging played a central role: CT revealed bony erosions (84.6%) and periarticular involvement (69.2%), while MRI, performed in 13 cases, showed signal abnormalities (85.7%), contrast enhancement (91.7%), and detected soft tissue abscesses (30.8%) and extension to adjacent bone or soft tissues (38.5%). Among the 10 patients who underwent both CT and MRI, MRI detected joint space widening more frequently than CT (70% vs. 50%, p = 0.038) and revealed periarticular infiltration in all cases compared to 60% on CT (p = 0.045). Conversely, CT identified bone sequestra in 50% of patients, whereas none were visualized on MRI (p = 0.041). Radiological follow-up showed improvement in 83.3% of cases, although residual lesions persisted.

conclusionISI is difficult to diagnose due to its non-specific presentation. Imaging is essential for early diagnosis, guiding treatment, and monitoring response.

Indexed as

Arthritis, InfectiousMagnetic Resonance ImagingSacroiliitisTomography, X-Ray ComputedAdolescentAdultAgedFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHumansMaleMiddle AgedRetrospective StudiesYoung AdultDiagnosisImagingSacroiliitisTreatment outcome

Identifiers

PMID40903677

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.