Epidemiological trends of pyogenic spondylodiscitis in Germany: an EANS Spine Section Study.

Pyogenic spondylodiscitis presents significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. In Germany, a comprehensive understanding of its epidemiology and inpatient management outcomes is limited, hindering the optimisation of therapeutic strategies. This study aimed to characterise the evolving epidemiological trends of pyogenic spondylodiscitis in Germany, and concurrently evaluate inpatient management strategies and outcomes. We performed a retrospective population-based study of spondylodiscitis cases in Germany from 2005 to 2021, utilising data from the German Federal Statistical Office database. The parameters assessed were incidence trends, demographic characteristics, inpatient management strategies, and inpatient mortality. The study found a significant rise in the population-adjusted incidence of spondylodiscitis in Germany from 2005 to 2021, increasing by 104% from 5.4 to 11.0 cases per 100,000 individuals (p < 0.001). The highest number of diagnoses was recorded in 2019. Age group-adjusted data revealed the largest relative changes in the "90 + " age group, followed by the "80-89" and "70-79" age groups. These increases were not solely attributable to population changes but were also confirmed after calculating the age-group-adjusted incidence rates. Additionally, our statistical analysis demonstrated that both age and year significantly influenced the incidence of spondylodiscitis. Over the same period, inpatient mortality also surged significantly by 347% (p < 0.001), with the highest increase recorded in the 90 + age group, observing a 2450% rise (p < 0.001). The mean length of inpatient stay decreased by 15% (p < 0.05). Concurrently, there was a significant increase in surgical interventions using spinal stabilisation procedures (p < 0.001), which might suggest a shift in the treatment paradigm for spondylodiscitis. The results underscore a concerning rise in spondylodiscitis incidence and mortality in Germany, particularly affecting the ageing population. A notable shift towards surgical intervention was observed. The data highlights the urgent necessity for high-level evidence studies comparing surgical versus conservative treatment, thereby guiding optimised therapeutic strategies.

Methodological and ethical challenges in the use of focused ultrasound for blood-brain barrier disruption in neuro-oncology.

BACKGROUND: Focused ultrasound (FUS) shows promise for enhancing drug delivery to the brain by temporarily opening the blood-brain barrier (BBB), and it is increasingly used in the clinical setting to treat brain tumours. It remains however unclear whether FUS is being introduced in an ethically and methodologically sound manner. The IDEAL-D framework for the introduction of surgical innovations and the SYRCLE and ROBINS-I tools for assessing the risk of bias in animal studies and non-randomized trials, respectively, provide a comprehensive evaluation for this. OBJECTIVES AND METHODS: A comprehensive literature review on FUS in neuro-oncology was conducted. Subsequently, the included studies were evaluated using the IDEAL-D framework, SYRCLE, and ROBINS-I tools. RESULTS: In total, 19 published studies and 12 registered trials were identified. FUS demonstrated successful BBB disruption, increased drug delivery, and improved survival rates. However, the SYRCLE analysis revealed a high risk of bias in animal studies, while the ROBINS-I analysis found that most human studies had a high risk of bias due to a lack of blinding and heterogeneous samples. Of the 15 pre-clinical stage 0 studies, only six had formal ethical approval, and only five followed animal care policies. Both stage 1 studies and stage 1/2a studies failed to provide information on patient data confidentiality. Overall, no animal or human study reached the IDEAL-D stage endpoint. CONCLUSION: FUS holds promise for enhancing drug delivery to the brain, but its development and implementation must adhere to rigorous safety standards using the established ethical and methodological frameworks. The complementary use of IDEAL-D, SYRCLE, and ROBINS-I tools indicates a high risk of bias and ethical limitations in both animal and human studies, highlighting the need for further improvements in study design for a safe implementation of FUS in neuro-oncology.