Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27484827›Full record

ReviewDer Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen2016

[Treatment of periprosthetic infections].

L Renner, C Perka, A Trampuz, N Renz

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Der Chirurg; Zeitschrift fur alle Gebiete der operativen Medizen, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
4.4field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 24 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

L RennerCentrum für Muskuloskeletale Chirurgie, Klinik für Orthopädie und Zentrum für Septische Chirurgie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland. lisa.renner@charite.de.
C PerkaCentrum für Muskuloskeletale Chirurgie, Klinik für Orthopädie und Zentrum für Septische Chirurgie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland.
A TrampuzCentrum für Muskuloskeletale Chirurgie, Klinik für Orthopädie und Zentrum für Septische Chirurgie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland.
N RenzCentrum für Muskuloskeletale Chirurgie, Klinik für Orthopädie und Zentrum für Septische Chirurgie, Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Charitéplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland.
Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The increasing number of prosthesis implantations and higher life expectancy lead to a growing number of periprosthetic infections (PPI). Optimal therapy necessitates interdisciplinary coordination of surgical and antimicrobial treatment. Challenges in the treatment are the increased occurrence of resistant pathogens, selection of adequate antimicrobial and surgical treatment strategies, inappropriate pretreatment and comorbidities of patients. Current treatment concepts lead to a high success rate in terms of infection eradication, when correctly applied. The individual expectations and underlying conditions of each patient must be considered when determining the therapy concept. The first step is to distinguish between acute and chronic infections. In acute infections the prosthesis can be retained but chronic infections necessitate a complete exchange of the prosthesis. Complicating factors, such as compromising soft tissue and bone conditions, osteomyelitis and infections caused by difficult-to-treat bacteria should, however, always be treated by a complete exchange of the prosthesis, even for acute infections. The antimicrobial treatment must be tailored to the causative agent, the surgical strategy as well as comorbidities and drug intolerances of the patient. It is important to distinguish between biofilm-active eradication therapy with rifampicin for gram-positive pathogens and quinolones for gram-negative organisms and suppression therapy. This article gives a structured presentation of the therapy algorithm.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBiofilmsChronic DiseaseCombined Modality TherapyDebridementGentamicinsHumansJoint ProsthesisProsthesis-Related InfectionsReoperationRifampinStaphylococcal InfectionsSurgical Wound InfectionGentamicinsRifampinBiofilmExchange of prosthesisJoint retentionProsthesesRifampicin

Identifiers

PMID27484827
OpenAlexW2484468653

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.