ArticleFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology2026
Application of a multidimensional and process-oriented evaluation system in PELD bridging therapy for lumbar spinal infections: a self-controlled retrospective study of 27 cases.
Article in Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Conventional cure rates are too stringent for percutaneous endoscopic lumbar discectomy (PELD)-based endoscopic debridement and drainage as a minimally invasive bridging procedure for spinal infections; a multidimensional evaluation system is needed. Methods: This single-center retrospective self-controlled study included 27 patients with modified Pola classification (POLA) type IV lumbar infections who underwent Stage I PELD-based endoscopic debridement and drainage followed by Stage II definitive surgery. The procedure was evaluated as a planned bridging intervention within an integrated treatment pathway rather than as an isolated curative treatment. A multidimensional system assessed biochemical, clinical (pain, appetite, temperature), imaging (magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)-based modified POLA), and anesthesiologist scores. Paired t-tests and Wilcoxon tests were used for within-patient comparisons. Results: Stage I PELD-based endoscopic debridement and drainage was completed in all patients (mean operation time, 82.4 min; mean blood loss, 18.5 mL; culture positivity, 55.6%). At final follow-up, visual analog scale (VAS) back-pain score decreased from 8.15 to 0.67, Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) decreased from 76.15% to 11.78%, and 36-Item Short Form Health Survey (SF-36) increased from 26.26 to 83.74 (all P<0.001). C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) decreased before Stage II surgery, body temperature improved, appetite improved in 63%, and modified POLA grading improved. These findings suggested clinical stabilization during the bridging window, whereas nutritional indicators (albumin, hemoglobin, and body mass index (BMI)) did not significantly change. Conclusion: PELD-based endoscopic debridement and drainage appears to be a feasible minimally invasive bridging strategy for modified POLA type IV lumbar infections. The observed improvements should be interpreted as preliminary evidence of clinical stabilization during staged treatment rather than proof of an independent curative effect of PELD. The proposed multidimensional evaluation system provides an exploratory framework for assessing early bridging response and requires further validation in larger controlled cohorts.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.