A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@gmail.com&api_key=61f08fa0b96a73de8c900d749fcb997acc09&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 197

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 197
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 271
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 1075
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3195
Function: GetPubMedArticleOutput_2016

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 597
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 511
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 317
Function: require_once

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

Category Ranking

98%

Total Visits

921

Avg Visit Duration

2 minutes

Citations

20

Article Abstract

Purpose: Infectious 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 Methods: We 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.

Results: The 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.

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

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00586-025-09319-5DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

infectious sacroiliitis
12
sacroiliitis isi
8
clinical microbiological
8
follow-up imaging
8
imaging
6
cases
6
mri
5
sacroiliitis insights
4
insights long-term
4
follow-up
4

Similar Publications