Microbiologic profile of infections in presumed aseptic revision spine surgery
European Spine Journal, ISSN: 1432-0932, Vol: 25, Issue: 12, Page: 3902-3907
2016
- 41Citations
- 49Captures
Metric Options: CountsSelecting the 1-year or 3-year option will change the metrics count to percentiles, illustrating how an article or review compares to other articles or reviews within the selected time period in the same journal. Selecting the 1-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year. Selecting the 3-year option compares the metrics against other articles/reviews that were also published in the same calendar year plus the two years prior.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Example: if you select the 1-year option for an article published in 2019 and a metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019. If you select the 3-year option for the same article published in 2019 and the metric category shows 90%, that means that the article or review is performing better than 90% of the other articles/reviews published in that journal in 2019, 2018 and 2017.
Citation Benchmarking is provided by Scopus and SciVal and is different from the metrics context provided by PlumX Metrics.
Metrics Details
- Citations41
- Citation Indexes41
- 41
- CrossRef36
- Captures49
- Readers49
- 49
Article Description
Purpose: Intra-operative cultures may be obtained in revision spine surgery despite the absence of pre-operative clinical markers of infection. The microbiologic profile of culture positive cases in which there is no clear evidence of infection preoperatively has not been described. The aim of this investigation is to report on the microbiologic profile of unexpected culture positive revision spine surgery cases. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 595 consecutive revision spine surgeries performed between 2008 and 2013. Five hundred and seventy-eight revision surgeries were performed for diagnoses other than infection and were included in the study. Results: Operative cultures were obtained in 112 cases (19.4 %). Cultures were positive in 45 cases. Pseudarthrosis was not only the most common diagnosis overall (49.1 %) in which intra-operative cultures were obtained, it was also the most common revision surgical diagnosis where cultures were positive (55.6 %). Propionibacterium acnes was cultured in 54.2 % of cases with the primary diagnosis of pseudarthrosis, but only in 40.9 % of cases with other diagnoses (P = 0.554). Overall, staphylococcal species were found most commonly (57.8 % of cases), but P. acnes was at least one of the isolates in 48.9 % of cases and was three times more common than any other organism. Conclusions: Nearly one in five patients with the diagnosis of pseudarthrosis were culture positive. More specifically, pseudarthrosis was the most common culture positive diagnosis and P. acnes species predominated in this patient population. Propionibacterium acnes was overwhelmingly the most common single organism cultured in revision spine surgery. Given this, we recommend all cultures be held for P. acnes, particularly in the setting of pseudarthrosis.
Bibliographic Details
http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84962222137&origin=inward; http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4539-8; http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27026016; http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s00586-016-4539-8; https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00586-016-4539-8; https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00586-016-4539-8
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Provide Feedback
Have ideas for a new metric? Would you like to see something else here?Let us know