Cited by 735Orthopedic Infections and TreatmentsAntimicrobial Resistance in StaphylococcusInfectious Diseases and Tuberculosis

Skeletal infections: microbial pathogenesis, immunity and clinical management

Open access
Masters, Elysia A., Ricciardi, Benjamin F., Bentley, Karen L. de Mesy, Moriarty, T. Fintan, Schwarz, Edward M., Muthukrishnan, Gowrishankar·2022·Nature Reviews Microbiology

Abstract

Osteomyelitis remains one of the greatest risks in orthopaedic surgery. Although many organisms are linked to skeletal infections, Staphylococcus aureus remains the most prevalent and devastating causative pathogen. Important discoveries have uncovered novel mechanisms of S. aureus pathogenesis and persistence within bone tissue, including implant-associated biofilms, abscesses and invasion of the osteocyte lacuno-canalicular network. However, little clinical progress has been made in the prevention and eradication of skeletal infection as treatment algorithms and outcomes have only incrementally changed over the past half century. In this Review, we discuss the mechanisms of persistence and immune evasion in S. aureus infection of the skeletal system as well as features of other osteomyelitis-causing pathogens in implant-associated and native bone infections. We also describe how the host fails to eradicate bacterial bone infections, and how this new information may lead to the development of novel interventions. Finally, we discuss the clinical management of skeletal infection, including osteomyelitis classification and strategies to treat skeletal infections with emerging technologies that could translate to the clinic in the future. Osteomyelitis is an infection of bone that arises when a pathogen colonizes bone tissue owing to injury or surgery. In this Review, Masters and colleagues explore the microbial pathogenesis, immunity and clinical management of bone infections.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41579-022-00686-0

Cites

213 of 213 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Infected bone defects pose an arduous orthopedic healthcare challenge due to resilient biofilms and intracellular pathogens, an immunosuppressive microenvironment that impairs bone regeneration, and large defects that are difficult to heal following surgical debridement.

    “Infected bone defects (IBDs) pose an arduous orthopedic healthcare challenge due to their complex pathophysiology: resilient biofilms and intracellular pathogens that evade conventional antibiotics, an immunosuppressive microenvironment that impairs bone regeneration, and large defects that are difficult to heal following surgical debridement [1,2].”

    From Nanocatalytic magnesium osteoimplants with biodegradable self-adaptive interfaces for therapeutic repair of infected bone defects (2026) · cites this paper as [1]

    The Biofilm formation and Intracellular infection sections describe hard-to-eradicate biofilms and intracellular S. aureus persistence; the immune-response section also describes suppression that enables bacterial persistence. The treatment discussion mentions debridement and large bone defects, but our copy does not establish that an immunosuppressive microenvironment impairs bone regeneration or that large defects are difficult to heal specifically after debridement. Page numbers were not available in the indexed passages. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Masters, E. A., Ricciardi, B. F., Bentley, K. L. D. M., Moriarty, T. F., Schwarz, E. M., & Muthukrishnan, G.
Affiliations
  • University of Rochester Medicine (US)
  • AO Foundation (CH)
Corresponding author
Schwarz, Edward M.
Venue
Nature Reviews Microbiology
Published
2022-02-15
Volume
20
Issue
7
Pages
385-400
ISSN
  • 1740-1526 (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-1534
OpenAlex
W4212885218
Cited by
735
References
213
Citations by year
2026: 190 · 2025: 226 · 2024: 171 · 2023: 104 · 2022: 42 · 2016: 1
FWCI
32.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Reviews Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • AO Foundation
  • National Institutes of Health (AR069655, AR072000)
  • National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases (AR072000, AR069655, P50AR072000, P30AR069655)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Orthopedic Infections and Treatments
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Antimicrobial Resistance in Staphylococcus
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Infectious Diseases and Tuberculosis
Keywords
osteomyelitis, skeletal infection, Staphylococcus aureus, implant-associated infection, biofilm, immune evasion, bacterial persistence, host immune response, orthopedic implants
MeSH terms
Humans, Osteomyelitis, Staphylococcal Infections, Staphylococcus aureus, Biofilms, Immune Evasion

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review