ArticleDer Orthopade2016
[Management of prosthetic joint infections].
Article in Der Orthopade, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Advantages in orthopaedic implant infection diagnostics by additional analysis of explants.International orthopaedics · 2025Article
- Surgical approaches in total hip arthroplasty do not influence the bacterial spectrum of acute postoperative periprosthetic joint infections.Journal of bone and joint infection · 2025Article
- Antimicrobial Biomaterials Based on Physical and Physicochemical Action.Advanced healthcare materials · 2024Review
- Preoperative Decolonization Appears to Reduce the Risk of Infection in High-Risk Groups Undergoing Total Hip Arthroplasty.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- [Pyoderma gangraenosum after implantation of a shoulder endoprothesis].Der Orthopade · 2017Article
- [Approach to joint effusion].Der Orthopade · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Infections of prosthetic joints with biofilm-forming pathogens are one of the most devastating complications for patients and surgeons. Although the incidence is low they result in massive restrictions in the quality of life and mobility for patients as well as high costs for the treatment. Crucial for an adequate management of prosthetic joint infections are primarily comprehensive diagnostics to be able to exclude an aseptic loosening and secondarily in the presence of an infection to identify the pathogen responsible for forming the biofilm. The correct grading of the infection is crucial for selecting the appropriate form of infection management. Established standards in surgical treatment as well as in microbiology have be considered.
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.