ReviewJournal of bone and joint infection2026
Integrating molecular and conventional diagnostics in native vertebral osteomyelitis: a narrative review.
Review in Journal of bone and joint infection, 2026. 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
Native vertebral osteomyelitis (NVO) remains a diagnostic challenge due to its non-specific presentation and the limited sensitivity of culture-based methods. Blood cultures and image-guided biopsies are considered the diagnostic standards, but their yield is often low, especially in patients who have received prior antibiotics or are infected with fastidious microorganisms. Recent molecular techniques, including polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and next-generation sequencing (NGS), have improved pathogen detection and enabled more targeted antimicrobial therapy. In this narrative review, we summarize the diagnostic methods used in NVO, including conventional microbiological and molecular approaches, and present their strengths and limitations based on previous studies. We particularly focus on situations where molecular diagnostic techniques, such as 16S rRNA PCR, NGS, and microbial cell-free DNA testing, outperform traditional culture-based methods in sensitivity, while their specificity may be comparatively lower. Combining these molecular tools with standard diagnostic procedures may improve pathogen detection, guide targeted treatment, and enhance diagnostic accuracy in culture-negative or antibiotic-pretreated cases. Understanding the advantages and limitations of each diagnostic method can help clinicians to choose the most appropriate testing strategy, reduce diagnostic delays, and improve patient management in suspected NVO.
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.