CORR Insights®: What Markers Best Guide the Timing of Reimplantation in Two-stage Exchange Arthroplasty for PJI? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

1. Performance of established test methods in diagnosing persistent infection at the second stage of a two-stage procedure for periprosthetic hip and knee infections.Bone & joint open · 2025
   Article
2. The change in plasma D-dimer does not help to guide the timing of reimplantation in two stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection.Scientific reports · 2021
   Article
3. Can we rely on the combination of serological tests and frozen sections at the time of reimplantation for two-stage exchange hip arthroplasty in patients with a "dry tap"?Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2019
   Article

Corrections and comments

• Comment on
  What Markers Best Guide the Timing of Reimplantation in Two-stage Exchange Arthroplasty for PJI? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.2018

Authors and funding

1 author.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

Abstract

PubMed holds no abstract for this paper.

Indexed as