Skip to content
DraconiticResearch
Search Sources API
189,105 studies31 sourcesUpdated 39 min ago
Peer-reviewedCC BYFrontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology

Inflammatory biomarkers in pyogenic spinal infection: evidence, limitations, and integrated diagnostic perspectives

  • Juntao Xu1
  • Juntao Xu2
  • Juntao Xu3
  • Yi Yang1
  • Yi Yang2
  • Yi Yang3
  • Weiyang Zhong1
  • Weiyang Zhong2
  • Weiyang Zhong3
  1. 1Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
  2. 2Chongqing Municipal Health Commission Key Laboratory of Musculoskeletal Regeneration and Translational Medicine, Chongqing, China
  3. 3Orthopaedic Research Laboratory of Chongqing Medical University, Chongqing, China
Read full textDOICite

Abstract

Pyogenic spinal infection (PSI) remains challenging to diagnose at an early stage because symptoms are often nonspecific, imaging findings may overlap with degenerative, neoplastic, or postoperative changes, and microbiological confirmation is frequently delayed or unavailable. Magnetic resonance imaging, microbiological culture, biopsy, and conventional inflammatory markers remain central to diagnosis, but their findings may be discordant, particularly in early infection, postoperative settings, chronic disease, and immunocompromised patients. Inflammatory cytokines and acute-phase markers reflect different aspects of the host response and may therefore provide useful information for clinical assessment, longitudinal follow-up, and the timing of reassessment. In this narrative and conceptual review, we examine the diagnostic value and limitations of conventional markers, including C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), white blood cell count (WBC), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), and interleukin-1β (IL-1β), together with emerging candidates such as procalcitonin (PCT), pentraxin 3 (PTX3), and S100A8/A9. Particular attention is paid to the source and directness of the available evidence, distinguishing studies conducted in PSI or native vertebral osteomyelitis from findings derived from postoperative spinal infection, periprosthetic joint infection, sepsis, and other bone and joint infections. We further discuss how longitudinal biomarker trajectories, differences among specimen sources, spatial heterogeneity of inflammatory signals, and circulating biomarker networks may help interpret diagnostically uncertain cases, while recognizing that several emerging biomarkers and integrated approaches still lack direct validation in PSI. The complementary role of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) and the potential use of artificial intelligence (AI) for integrating heterogeneous clinical information are also considered, together with their current methodological and clinical limitations. Overall, inflammatory biomarkers are best interpreted as components of an evidence-informed diagnostic and reassessment framework that integrates clinical findings, imaging, microbiology, and changes in the host inflammatory response, rather than as standalone tests for PSI.

Related

  1. Protease-serpin-microbiome interactions in inflammatory bowel disease: toward integrated biomarkers of gut health
    Meshal Almalki, Camilla R de Pierri, Tristan Méric +10
    Gut microbesPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textGeneral biochemistryMicrobiologyHAL
  2. Identification of shared diagnostic biomarkers and immune-related mechanisms between sepsis and thoracic aortic aneurysm based on integrated bioinformatics and machine learning approaches
    Chengqun She, Hao Deng, Yaoguang Feng +2
    PLOS OnePeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0Full textImmunologyPLOS
  3. Integrated transcriptomic, machine learning, and network pharmacology analyses reveal shared inflammatory biomarkers between intervertebral disc degeneration and osteoporosis
    Mengjie Zheng, Guizhi Zhu, Hongde Jiang +5
    Frontiers in immunologyPeer-reviewedCC BYFull textImmunologyEurope PMCCrossref
  4. Deciphering Vascular Smooth Muscle Cell Phenotype Switching via Integrated Single-Cell Transcriptomics and Machine Learning: CX3CR1 and COL1A1 as Novel Diagnostic Biomarkers for Atherosclerosis
    Zhiqiang Wang, Zhenyu Zhao, Zhixi Hu +1
    MetabolitesPeer-reviewedCC BY 4.0ImmunologyCrossref
  5. Integrated 16S rRNA Bioinformatics Analysis of Gut Microbiota, Predicted Pathways, and Candidate Biomarkers in Inflammatory Bowel Disease
    A. Zehra, E. Natarajan
    bioRxivPreprintCC BYFull textBioinformatics & computational biologybioRxiv

Cite

BibTeXRIS
BibTeX
@article{xu2026inflammatory,
  title = {{Inflammatory biomarkers in pyogenic spinal infection: evidence, limitations, and integrated diagnostic perspectives}},
  author = {Juntao Xu and Juntao Xu and Juntao Xu and Yi Yang and Yi Yang and Yi Yang and Weiyang Zhong and Weiyang Zhong and Weiyang Zhong},
  journal = {Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology},
  year = {2026},
  month = nov,
  doi = {10.3389/fcimb.2026.1863268},
  url = {https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2026.1863268},
  note = {CC BY},
}
RIS
TY  - JOUR
TI  - Inflammatory biomarkers in pyogenic spinal infection: evidence, limitations, and integrated diagnostic perspectives
AU  - Juntao Xu
AU  - Juntao Xu
AU  - Juntao Xu
AU  - Yi Yang
AU  - Yi Yang
AU  - Yi Yang
AU  - Weiyang Zhong
AU  - Weiyang Zhong
AU  - Weiyang Zhong
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/11/04
JO  - Frontiers in Cellular and Infection Microbiology
DO  - 10.3389/fcimb.2026.1863268
UR  - https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2026.1863268
AB  - Pyogenic spinal infection (PSI) remains challenging to diagnose at an early stage because symptoms are often nonspecific, imaging findings may overlap with degenerative, neoplastic, or postoperative changes, and microbiological confirmation is frequently delayed or unavailable. Magnetic resonance imaging, microbiological culture, biopsy, and conventional inflammatory markers remain central to diagnosis, but their findings may be discordant, particularly in early infection, postoperative settings, chronic disease, and immunocompromised patients. Inflammatory cytokines and acute-phase markers reflect different aspects of the host response and may therefore provide useful information for clinical assessment, longitudinal follow-up, and the timing of reassessment. In this narrative and conceptual review, we examine the diagnostic value and limitations of conventional markers, including C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), white blood cell count (WBC), interleukin-6 (IL-6), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), and interleukin-1β (IL-1β), together with emerging candidates such as procalcitonin (PCT), pentraxin 3 (PTX3), and S100A8/A9. Particular attention is paid to the source and directness of the available evidence, distinguishing studies conducted in PSI or native vertebral osteomyelitis from findings derived from postoperative spinal infection, periprosthetic joint infection, sepsis, and other bone and joint infections. We further discuss how longitudinal biomarker trajectories, differences among specimen sources, spatial heterogeneity of inflammatory signals, and circulating biomarker networks may help interpret diagnostically uncertain cases, while recognizing that several emerging biomarkers and integrated approaches still lack direct validation in PSI. The complementary role of metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) and the potential use of artificial intelligence (AI) for integrating heterogeneous clinical information are also considered, together with their current methodological and clinical limitations. Overall, inflammatory biomarkers are best interpreted as components of an evidence-informed diagnostic and reassessment framework that integrates clinical findings, imaging, microbiology, and changes in the host inflammatory response, rather than as standalone tests for PSI.
SN  - 2235-2988
ER  -