Systematic reviewindependent cross-checkabstract only checked I-ORG-11 standard review
Infections after spleen removal
Risk of infection and death among post-splenectomy patients.
Overview
Bisharat N et al.. J Infect 2001 · PMID 11798256 · DOI 10.1053/jinf.2001.0904
About 3% developed serious infections and 1.4% died of them over about 7 years in older studies.
Does the study support the specific claim? Yes · Methodological quality: low
Plain-language summary
Study explained simply
- What did the researchers want to find out?
OPSI
- How was the study done?
Review
- How many people, animals or samples were studied?
19,680
- What was actually found?
Infection 3.2%
- How large was the observed effect?
3.2%/1.4%
- What do the results mean in everyday life?
Infection risk is real; vaccination matters
- What are the study's limitations?
Old data
- What does it say about Elawady's specific claim?
Supports
- Do the results apply to Germany and Europe?
Applicable
- What can explicitly not be concluded from this study?
Current risk with vaccines
Scientific in-depth review
1. Full reference
- Authors
- Bisharat N et al.
- Journal
- J Infect
- Year
- 2001
- Identifier
- PMID 11798256 DOI 10.1053/jinf.2001.0904
- Verification
- verified – PubMed efetch 2026-10-25
- Retracted
- no
- Corrections
- none
- Extent checked
- abstract only
- Conflicts of interest and funding
not stated in abstract
2. Research question
Incidence of post-splenectomy sepsis
3. Study design and population
- Study design
- Systematic review – Literature review with pooled data
- Sample size
19,680 patients (6942 analysable)
4. Methods and endpoints
5. Actual results
- Results
Infection 3.2%, mortality 1.4% over median 6.9 years; highest in thalassaemia major (8.2% infection, 5.1% mortality) and sickle-cell anaemia.
- Absolute risks
not reported
- Authors' conclusion
Sepsis incidence low but high mortality, especially in children with haematological disorders.
6. Strengths
- Large pooled sample
7. Weaknesses
- Old literature 1966-96
- Pre-modern vaccination
8. Risk of bias
- Orienting tool
- AMSTAR 2
- Type of assessment
- simplified assessment (abstract only)
- Full formal assessment
- no
- Overall risk of bias
- high
9. Assessment of the statistical interpretation
10. Relevance to the specific claim
Supports C-ORG-12 (infection risk) with absolute numbers.
11. Independent contrary findings
12. Transferability to Germany and Europe
Applicable with caution (older data).
13. Overall methodological judgement
Confirms well-known infection risk.
| Multidimensional assessment | |
|---|---|
| Authenticity of the source | verified |
| Methodological quality | low |
| Risk of bias | high |
| Precision of results | moderate |
| Directness | direct |
| Reproducibility | replicated |
| Consistency with the overall evidence | consistent |
| Regional transferability | moderate |
| Adequacy of the interpretation (by the archive) | not applicable |