ArticleDer Orthopade2020
[Very rare cases of periprosthetic malignant neoplasms : Data from 4000 cases of endoprosthetic joint replacements from the histopathologic implant register].
Article in Der Orthopade, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- [Pathologies of joint endoprostheses : Histopathological diagnostics for endoprosthetic centers].Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2025Article
- [Histopathological diagnostics of arthrofibrosis].Unfallchirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Review
- [Typing and particle analysis of squeaking hip endoprostheses : First histopathological analysis to examine the squeaking pathogenesis of ceramic-on-ceramic bearings].Der Orthopade · 2021Article
- [PJI-TNM as new classification system for periprosthetic joint infections : An evaluation of 20 cases].Der Orthopade · 2021Article
- [Joint tumors: rare but important differential diagnoses of malignant and benign tumors as well as pseudotumors in rheumatology].Zeitschrift fur Rheumatologie · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn 2016, the AG 11 (work group for implant-material-intolerance) of the German society for Orthopaedics and Orthopaedic Surgery (DGOOC) created a histopathologic implant register (HIR). The goal was to conduct a retrospective data analysis based on the revised SLIM-consensus-classification, which defines eight different failure mechanisms. QUESTIONS: The analysis of 4000 cases of endoprosthetic joint replacements addressed the following questions: 1. What is the frequency distribution of different SLIM-types? 2. How does durability of endoprosthetic joint replacements differ among SLIM-types? 3. What kind of periprosthetic malignant neoplasia can be detected and how often?
resultsSLIM-type I was diagnosed in 1577 cases (n = 1577, 39.4%), SLIM-type II in 577 cases (n = 577; 14.4%), SLIM-type III in 146 cases (n = 146; 3,7%), SLIM-type IV in 1151 cases (n = 1151; 28.8%), SLIM-type V in 361 cases (n = 361; 9.0%), SLIM-type VI in 143 cases (n = 143; 3.6%), SLIM-type VII in 42 cases (n = 42; 1.0%), and SLIM-type VIII in 3 cases (n = 3; 0.075%). There was statistical significance in implant durability between the different SLIM types. Among the different reasons for endoprosthetic joint replacement failure, non-infectious causes have the biggest share at 81%, with SLIM-type I (39.5%), and SLIM-type IV (29.4%) being the predominant SLIM types. Three cases of periprosthetic malignant neoplasia (SLIM-type VIII) were detected: one case of small B lymphocytic lymphoma/BCLL (C85.9; ICD-O: 9670/3), one case of diffuse large B‑cell lymphoma/DLBCL (C83.3; ICD‑O 9680/3), and one case of anaplastic large cell lymphoma (C84.7; ICD-O: 9714/3), with the latter ones being the causes for joint replacement , which indicates that malignant neoplasia is a very rare cause of endoprosthetic joint replacement (n = 2; 0.05%). DISCUSSION: These data are complete new, especially as concerns arthrofibrosis (SLIM-type V), adverse inflammatory reactions (SLIM-type VI), and the very rare cases of periprosthetic malignant neoplasia, SLIM-type VIII, as a reason for revision. Since neither the annual review (2017) of the EPRD, nor the national evaluation report (2017) of the IQTIG provide sufficient data, this indicates the relevance of the HIR of the AG 11 of the DGOOC.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31784796What 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.