Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28265758›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2017

Silver-coated megaprostheses: review of the literature.

Tom Schmidt-Braekling, Arne Streitbuerger, Georg Gosheger, Friedrich Boettner, Markus Nottrott, Helmut Ahrens, Ralf Dieckmann, Wiebke Guder, Dimosthenis Andreou, Gregor Hauschild and 3 more

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 32 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
32citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

32 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. [Tumour arthroplasty].Der Orthopade · 2021
    Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. 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

13 authors.

Tom Schmidt-BraeklingDepartment of Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany. Tom.Schmidt-Braekling@ukmuenster.de.
Arne StreitbuergerDepartment of Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany.
Georg GoshegerDepartment of Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany.
Friedrich BoettnerAdult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Division, Hospital for Special Surgery, Weill Medical College of Cornell University, New York, NY, USA.
Markus NottrottDepartment of Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany.
Helmut AhrensDepartment of Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany.
Ralf DieckmannDepartment of Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany.
Wiebke GuderDepartment of Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany.
Dimosthenis AndreouDepartment of Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany.
Gregor HauschildDepartment of Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany.
Burkhard MoellenbeckDepartment of Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany.
Wenzel WaldsteinDepartment of Orthopedics, Vienna General Hospital, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Jendrik HardesDepartment of Orthopedics and Tumor Orthopedics, Muenster University Hospital, Muenster, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Periprosthetic infection remains one of the most serious complications following megaendoprostheses. Despite a large number of preventive measures that have been introduced in recent years, it has not been possible to further reduce the rate of periprosthetic infection. With regard to metallic modification of implants, silver in particular has been regarded as highly promising, since silver particles combine a high degree of antimicrobial activity with a low level of human toxicity. This review provides an overview of the history of the use of silver as an antimicrobial agent, its mechanism of action, and its clinical application in the field of megaendoprosthetics. The benefits of silver-coated prostheses could not be confirmed until now. However, a large number of retrospective studies suggest that the rate of periprosthetic infections could be reduced by using silver-coated megaprostheses.

Indexed as

Prosthesis DesignCoated Materials, BiocompatibleFemaleHumansIncidenceMalePrognosisProstheses and ImplantsProsthesis ImplantationProsthesis-Related InfectionsRisk AssessmentSilverTreatment OutcomeCoated Materials, BiocompatibleSilverInfection preventionMegaprosthesisPeriprosthetic infectionSilver

Identifiers

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.