ArticleKnee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA2019
Higher failure rate of two-stage revision for infected knee arthroplasties in significantly compromised (host-C) patients.
Article in Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Novel, static, permanent spacers to treat chronic knee periprosthetic joint infections.International orthopaedics · 2023Article
- Impact of Comorbidities and Previous Surgery on Mid-Term Results of Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic Joint Infection.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- Periprosthetic Knee Infection - Part 2: Treatment.Revista brasileira de ortopedia · 2022Article
- Classifications in Brief: The McPherson Classification of Periprosthetic Infection.Clinical orthopaedics and related research · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate clinical outcomes of two-stage revision arthroplasty for managing infected knee arthroplasties in significantly compromised patients (host-C).
methodsThis was a prospective consecutive series of two-stage revisions of infected total knee arthroplasties in host-C-type patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up using objective and patient-reported outcome measures. Thirteen consecutive patients were included and prospectively followed with a median 5-year follow-up (range 2-10). Median age was 68 years (range 59-73) at time of initial presentation. All patients were type-C host using McPherson classification system. All patients had primary arthroplasties in situ with confirmed chronic infections; the infecting pathogens were Staphylococcus aureus in 5/13 patients, coagulase-negative Staphylococci in 5/13, and the remaining three patients had mixed growth. All patients underwent two-stage revision protocol.
resultsAt the final follow-up, 9/13 patients were infection free achieving satisfactory outcomes. Two patients had recurrent infections with different organisms and treated with suppressive antibiotics and salvage knee arthrodesis, respectively. Furthermore, two patients had chronic pain and poor functional outcomes with deficient extensor mechanism and significant bone loss; later underwent salvage knee arthrodesis. The preoperative knee society score (median 35.5; range 22-51; n = 10) showed a statistically significant improvement at the final follow-up (median 79.5; range 49-87; n = 10) p < 0.05. Patients reported outcome scores at the final follow-up were WOMAC-knee (median 59.1; range 47.7-94.7; n = 13) and Oxford knee score (median 26; range 11 to 43; n = 13).
conclusionThis study highlights the challenge of treating infected knee arthroplasties in physiologically compromised patients with 9/13 (69%) having satisfactory clinical outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Case series, level IV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
30022230What 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.