A disease that is difficult to diagnose and treat: evaluation of 343 spondylodiscitis cases

Safak Kaya, Sehmuz Kaya, Seyhmus Kavak, Senol Comoglu, Safak Kaya, Sehmuz Kaya, Seyhmus Kavak, Senol Comoglu

Abstract

Objective: Spondylodiscitis is an important clinical a problem requiring serious approaches. In this study, we sought to raise awareness by examining the epidemiology and laboratory, clinical, and radiological findings of spondylodiscitis, which sometimes has a delayed diagnosis and which can be difficult to treat.

Methods: In total, 343 patients with spondylodiscitis were included in the study.

Results: The patients were classified as having as pyogenic (n = 153, 44.6%), brucellar (n = 138, 40.2%), or tuberculous (n = 52, 15.2%) spondylodiscitis. Meanwhile, 281 patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging, 71 underwent computed tomography, and 17 underwent scintigraphy for diagnosis. The rates of involvement at more than two segments and paraspinal abscess were significantly higher in tuberculous spondylodiscitis. However, disc involvement was significantly more common in brucellar and pyogenic spondylodiscitis.

Conclusion: The incidence of spondylodiscitis has increased substantially, especially in the young population. The invasive procedures and high rate of culture negativity make the diagnosis difficult. Therefore, clinical and radiological findings are useful in the diagnosis of spondylodiscitis. Despite the high rate of culture negativity, every effort should be made to identify the causative organism using invasive methods.

Keywords: Spondylodiscitis; bone pain; brucellar; disc involvement; paraspinal abscess; pyogenic; tuberculosis.

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of conflicting interest: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Bacteria isolated from the blood and tissue cultures of patients with spondylodiscitis.

References

    1. Sapico FL andMontgomerie JZ.. Pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis: report of nine cases and review of the literature. Rev Infect Dis 1979; 1: 754–776.
    1. Issa K, Diebo BG, Faloon M, et al.. The Epidemiology of Vertebral Osteomyelitis in the United States From 1998 to 2013. Clin Spine Surg 2018; 31: E102–E108.
    1. Gupta A, Kowalski TJ, Osmon DR, et al.. Long-term outcome of pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis: a cohort study of 260 patients. Open Forum Infect Dis 2014; 1: ofu107.
    1. Dagirmanjian A, Schils J, McHenry M, et al.. MR imaging of vertebral osteomyelitis revisited. Am J Roentgenol 1996; 167: 1539–1543.
    1. Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al.. The Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. Ann Intern Med 2007; 147: 573–577.
    1. Jensen AG, Espersen F, Skinhoj P, et al.. Increasing frequency of vertebral osteomyelitis following Staphylococcus aureus bacteraemia in Denmark 1980–1990. J Infect 1997; 34: 113–118.
    1. Gouliouris T Aliyu SH andBrown NM.. Spondylodiscitis: update on diagnosis and management. J Antimicrob Chemother 2010; 65: iii11–iii24.
    1. Jensen AG, Espersen F, Skinhoj P, et al.. Bacteremic Staphylococcus aureus spondylitis. Arch Intern Med 1998; 158: 509–517.
    1. Kaya S, Ercan S, Kaya S, et al.. Spondylodiscitis: evaluation of patients in a tertiary hospital. J Infect Dev Ctries 2014; 8: 1272–1276.
    1. Acosta FL, Jr, Chin CT, Quiñones-Hinojosa A, et al.. Diagnosis and management of adult pyogenic osteomyelitis of the cervical spine. Neurosurg Focus 2004; 17: E2.
    1. Eismont FJ, Bohlman HH, Soni PL, et al.. Pyogenic and fungal vertebral osteomyelitis with paralysis. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1983; 65: 19–29.
    1. Le Page L, Feydy A, Rillardon L, et al.. Spinal tuberculosis: a longitudinal study with clinical, laboratory, and imaging outcomes. Semin Arthritis Rheum 2006; 36: 124–129.
    1. Gentile L, Benazzo F, De Rosa F, et al.. A systematic review: characteristics, complications and treatment of spondylodiscitis. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci 2019; 23: 117–128.
    1. Yangwon L, Bum-Joon K, Se-Hoon K, et al.. Comparative Analysis of Spontaneous Infectious Spondylitis: Pyogenic versus Tuberculous. J Korean Neurosurg Soc 2018; 61: 81–88.
    1. Lew DP andWaldvogel FA.. Osteomyelitis. Lancet 2004; 364: 369–379.
    1. Madhavan K, Chieng LO, Armstrong VL, et al.. Spondylodiscitis in end-stage renal disease: a systematic review. J Neurosurg Spine 2019: 1–9.
    1. Carragee EJ, Kim D, Van Der Vlugt T, et al.. The clinical use of erythrocyte sedimentation rate in pyogenic vertebral osteomyelitis. Spine (Phila Pa 1976) 1997; 22: 2089–2093.
    1. Unkila-Kallio L, Kallio MJ, Eskola J, et al.. Serum C-reactive protein, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and white blood cell count in acute hematogenous osteomyelitis of children. Pediatrics 1994; 93: 59–62.
    1. Hamidi AA, Özsüt H, Başaran S, et al.. Tuberculous, Pyogenic and Brucellar Spondylodiscitis: Clinical and Laboratory Features of 103 Cases. Klimik Dergisi 2015; 28: 80–86. [In Turkish]
    1. Singh K Rechtine G andHeler JG.. Postoperative spinal infections. In: Herkowitz HN Garfin SR Eismont FJ Bell GR andBalderstan RA (eds) Rothman-Simeone The Spine. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders-Elsevier, 2006, pp.1496–1507.
    1. Hamidi AA, Özsüt H, Başaran S, et al. Doğan H. Tuberculous, Pyogenic and Brucellar Spondylodiscitis: Clinical and Laboratory Features of 103 Cases. Klimik Dergisi 2015; 28: 80–86.
    1. D’Agostino C, Scorzolini L, Massetti AP, et al.. A seven-year prospective study on spondylodiscitis: epidemiological and microbiological features. Infect 2010; 38: 102–107.

Source: PubMed

Sponsorit ja yhteistyökumppanit

Sairaudet

Huumeiden interventiot

3
Tilaa