Association between Type 1 Modic Changes and <i>Propionibacterium Acnes</i> Infection in the Cervical Spine: An Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Research on the association between Propionibacterium acnes in the disc space and type 1 Modic changes in adjacent vertebrae is limited and has produced mixed results. The prevalence of bacteria in intervertebral discs contradicts the prior understanding that skeletal areas in the human anatomy are sterile; yet it opens new treatment possibilities. We investigated the relationship of P acnes and type 1 Modic changes in the cervical spine. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over a 36-month period, we collected intraoperative biopsies of patients undergoing a routine cervical spine operation for degenerative disc diseases. The disc material was cultured aerobically and anaerobically for 7 days. All preoperative MR images were evaluated for Modic changes by a board-certified neuroradiologist. Medical records were reviewed for other spine interventions before the operation. RESULTS: The study population consisted of 48 patients. Of these, 14 patients tested positive for P acnes (29%) at ≥1 level. Additionally, 13 patients had type 1 Modic changes (27%) at ≥1 level; 54% (95% CI, 27%–84%) of patients who had type 1 Modic changes were also positive for P acnes compared with 20% (95% CI, 7%–33%) of patients without type 1 Modic changes. The difference between these proportions was 34% (95% CI, 4%–64%). The Fisher exact test produced a P value of .03 for the association between P acnes and MC1, and .53 for the association between P acnes and prior procedures. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that P acnes was prevalent in the degenerated cervical spine and that type 1 Modic changes were predictive of a culture positive for P acnes. We also found that the prevalence of P acnes was not associated with previous interventions. If these results are validated by future studies, they could have a major impact on the standard of care for back and neck pain.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".