SynthesisPloS one2016
Re-Infection Outcomes Following One- And Two-Stage Surgical Revision of Infected Knee Prosthesis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in PloS one, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03741296 (REVISITS Trial), which is not on this map. Cited by 131 papers, 14 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
REVISITS Trial: Revision Single or Two Stage Surgery for Periprosthetic Hip Infection - a Multicentre Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
131 citing papers in PubMed, 14 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Metal-artefact-reduction MRI for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Skeletal radiology · 2026Pooled it
- Local antibiotic delivery via intra-articular catheter infusion for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infection: a systematic review.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024Pooled it
- Systematic review and meta-analysis of single-stage vs two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection: a call for a prospective randomized trial.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2024Pooled it
- Acute kidney injury in the context of staged revision arthroplasty and the use of antibiotic-laden cement spacers: a systematic review.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2023Pooled it
- Reinfection rates after one- and two-stage revision surgery for hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Pooled it
- The autoclaving and re-implantation of an infected prosthesis as a spacer during resection knee arthroplasty: a systematic review.Musculoskeletal surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Sonication fluid culture of antibiotic-loaded bone cement spacer has high accuracy to confirm eradication of infection before reimplantation of new prostheses.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2021Pooled it
- Renal complications in COVID-19: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Annals of medicine · 2020Pooled it
- Meta-analysis in periprosthetic joint infection: a global bibliometric analysis.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2020Pooled it
- One- and two-stage surgical revision of infected elbow prostheses following total joint replacement: a systematic review.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2019Pooled it
- One- and two-stage surgical revision of infected shoulder prostheses following arthroplasty surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2019Pooled it
- Re-infection rates and clinical outcomes following arthrodesis with intramedullary nail and external fixator for infected knee prosthesis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2018Pooled it
- Do Culture-Negative Periprosthetic Joint Infections Have a Worse Outcome Than Culture-Positive Periprosthetic Joint Infections? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.BioMed research international · 2018Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Translation-driven design: development of an antibiotic-loaded hydrogel for the management of orthopaedic device-related infection.Bioactive materials · 2026Article
- Use of a Bioresorbable Antibacterial Coating (DACAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Toward Evidence-Informed Staging in Septic Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty: One-Stage, 1.5-Stage, or Two-Stage?Cureus · 2026Review
- Complementary Activities of Bacteriophages and Antimicrobial Peptide Dendrimers Against Prosthetic Joint Infection Pathogens.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Synovial fluid proteomic biomarkers in periprosthetic joint infection: A systematic review with gene ontology and protein network analyses.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Review
- [Perioperative antibiotic prophylaxis-current clinical practise in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in Germany and establishment of an standard operating procedure (SOP) for primary, revision, and tumor TJA].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Article
71 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication of total knee arthroplasty. Two-stage revision is the most widely used technique and considered as the most effective for treating periprosthetic knee infection. The one-stage revision strategy is an emerging alternative option, however, its performance in comparison to the two-stage strategy is unclear. We therefore sought to ask if there was a difference in re-infection rates and other clinical outcomes when comparing the one-stage to the two-stage revision strategy.
objectiveOur first objective was to compare re-infection (new and recurrent infections) rates for one- and two-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic knee infection. Our second objective was to compare between the two revision strategies, clinical outcomes as measured by postoperative Knee Society Knee score, Knee Society Function score, Hospital for Special Surgery knee score, WOMAC score, and range of motion.
designSystematic review and meta-analysis. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, reference lists of relevant studies to August 2015, and correspondence with investigators. STUDY SELECTION: Longitudinal (prospective or retrospective cohort) studies conducted in generally unselected patients with periprosthetic knee infection treated exclusively by one- or two-stage revision and with re-infection outcomes reported within two years of revision surgery. No clinical trials comparing both revision strategies were identified. REVIEW
methodsTwo independent investigators extracted data and discrepancies were resolved by consensus with a third investigator. Re-infection rates from 10 one-stage studies (423 participants) and 108 two-stage studies (5,129 participants) were meta-analysed using random-effect models after arcsine transformation.
resultsThe rate (95% confidence intervals) of re-infection was 7.6% (3.4-13.1) in one-stage studies. The corresponding re-infection rate for two-stage revision was 8.8% (7.2-10.6). In subgroup analyses, re-infection rates remained generally similar for several study-level and clinically relevant characteristics. Postoperative clinical outcomes of knee scores and range of motion were similar for both revision strategies. LIMITATIONS: Potential bias owing to the limited number of one-stage revision studies and inability to explore heterogeneity in greater detail.
conclusionsAvailable evidence from aggregate published data suggest the one-stage revision strategy may be as effective as the two-stage revision strategy in treating infected knee prostheses in generally unselected patients. Further investigation is warranted. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO 2015: CRD42015017327.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.