Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26341272›Full record

ReviewAnaerobe2015

Anaerobic prosthetic joint infection.

Neel B Shah, Aaron J Tande, Robin Patel, Elie F Berbari

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Anaerobe, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 38 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
38citing papers in PubMed
6.5field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

38 citing papers in PubMed, 80 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. In vitro emergence of amoxicillin-resistance and impact of amoxicillin on biofilm production across Cutibacterium acnes phylotypes?European journal of clinical microbiology & infectious diseases : official publication of the European Society of Clinical Microbiology · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Bacterial skin colonization with a specificMicrobiology spectrum · 2025
    Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Microbiology of chronic mesh infection.Hernia : the journal of hernias and abdominal wall surgery · 2023
    Review
  16. First periprosthetic hip infection caused by Eggerthella lenta.Journal of clinical orthopaedics and trauma · 2023
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Neel B ShahDivision of Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Aaron J TandeDivision of Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Robin PatelDivision of Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA; Division of Clinical Microbiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.
Elie F BerbariDivision of Infectious Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. Electronic address: berbari.elie@mayo.edu.
Mayo Clinic in Florida · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In an effort to improve mobility and alleviate pain from degenerative and connective tissue joint disease, an increasing number of individuals are undergoing prosthetic joint replacement in the United States. Joint replacement is a highly effective intervention, resulting in improved quality of life and increased independence [1]. By 2030, it is predicted that approximately 4 million total hip and knee arthroplasties will be performed yearly in the United States [2]. One of the major complications associated with this procedure is prosthetic joint infection (PJI), occurring at a rate of 1-2% [3-7]. In 2011, the Musculoskeletal Infectious Society created a unifying definition for prosthetic joint infection [8]. The following year, the Infectious Disease Society of America published practice guidelines that focused on the diagnosis and management of PJI. These guidelines focused on the management of commonly encountered organisms associated with PJI, including staphylococci, streptococci and select aerobic Gram-negative bacteria. However, with the exception of Propionibacterium acnes, management of other anaerobic organisms was not addressed in these guidelines [1]. Although making up approximately 3-6% of PJI [9,10], anaerobic microorganisms cause devastating complications, and similar to the more common organisms associated with PJI, these bacteria also result in significant morbidity, poor outcomes and increased health-care costs. Data on diagnosis and management of anaerobic PJI is mostly derived from case reports, along with a few cohort studies [3]. There is a paucity of published data outlining factors associated with risks, diagnosis and management of anaerobic PJI. We therefore reviewed available literature on anaerobic PJI by systematically searching the PubMed database, and collected data from secondary searches to determine information on pathogenesis, demographic data, clinical features, diagnosis and management. We focused our search on five commonly encountered anaerobic organisms associated with PJI. Since anaerobic PJI has also been linked to dental procedures, we also reviewed information on the use of dental procedures and prophylaxis, when available.

Indexed as

AnimalsBacteria, AnaerobicHumansJoint ProsthesisProsthesis-Related InfectionsAnaerobeInfectionProsthetic joint

Identifiers

PMID26341272
OpenAlexW1781538727

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.