Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31810305›Full record

ReviewMaterials (Basel, Switzerland)2019

PMMA-Based Bone Cements and the Problem of Joint Arthroplasty Infections: Status and New Perspectives.

Alessandro Bistolfi, Riccardo Ferracini, Carlo Albanese, Enrica Vernè, Marta Miola

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Materials (Basel, Switzerland), 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 54 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
54citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

54 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 118 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  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

5 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Alessandro BistolfiAO Citta' della Salute e della Scienza. CTO Hospital, Department of Orthopedics. Via Zuretti 29, 10126 Turin, Italy.
Riccardo FerraciniIRCCS Ospedale Policlinico San Martino, Department of Surgical Sciences and Integrated Diagnostics, University of Genova, Largo R. Benzi 10, 16132 Genova, Italy.
Carlo AlbaneseAO Citta' della Salute e della Scienza. CTO Hospital, Department of Orthopedics. Via Zuretti 29, 10126 Turin, Italy.
Enrica VernèDepartment of Applied Science and Technology, PolitoBIOMed Lab, Politecnico di Torino, C.so Duca Degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-8649-4739
Marta MiolaDepartment of Applied Science and Technology, PolitoBIOMed Lab, Politecnico di Torino, C.so Duca Degli Abruzzi 24, 10129 Torino, Italy.
CTO Hospital · ITPolitecnico di Torino · ITOspedale Policlinico San Martino · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA)-based bone cement is a biomaterial that has been used over the last 50 years to stabilize hip and knee implants or as a bone filler. Although PMMA-based bone cement is widely used and allows a fast-primary fixation to the bone, it does not guarantee a mechanically and biologically stable interface with bone, and most of all it is prone to bacteria adhesion and infection development. In the 1970s, antibiotic-loaded bone cements were introduced to reduce the infection rate in arthroplasty; however, the efficiency of antibiotic-containing bone cement is still a debated issue. For these reasons, in recent years, the scientific community has investigated new approaches to impart antibacterial properties to PMMA bone cement. The aim of this review is to summarize the current status regarding antibiotic-loaded PMMA-based bone cements, fill the gap regarding the lack of data on antibacterial bone cement, and explore the progress of antibacterial bone cement formulations, focusing attention on the new perspectives. In particular, this review highlights the innovative study of composite bone cements containing inorganic antibacterial and bioactive phases, which are a fascinating alternative that can impart both osteointegration and antibacterial properties to PMMA-based bone cement.

Indexed as

additivesantibacterialantibioticsbioactivepolymethyl methacrylate-based bone cement

Identifiers

PMID31810305
PMCPMC6926619
OpenAlexW2989786240

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.