ArticleBone & joint research2019
A sophisticated antibiotic-loading protocol in articulating cement spacers for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection: A retrospective cohort study.
Article in Bone & joint research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Dual-antibiotic bone cement (gentamicin + vancomycin) in preventing and treating infections during revision knee arthroplasty in high-risk patients.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
- Modified masquelet technique coupled with vascularized fibular transplantation (transposition) in the reconstruction of ultra-long structural bone defects following osteomyelitis debridement: clinical application and preliminary study on therapeutic outcomes.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2025Article
- Optimizing vancomycin release from novel carbon fiber-reinforced polymer implants with small holes: periprosthetic joint infection treatment.Journal of artificial organs : the official journal of the Japanese Society for Artificial Organs · 2024Article
- Animal experimental investigation on the efficacy of antibiotic therapy with linezolid, vancomycin, cotrimoxazole, and rifampin in treatment of periprosthetic knee joint infections by MRSA.Bone & joint research · 2022Article
- Elution and Biomechanical Properties of Meropenem-Loaded Bone Cement.Orthopaedic surgery · 2021Article
- What is the appropriate extended duration of antibiotic prophylaxis after two-stage revision for chronic PJI?Bone & joint research · 2021Article
- Antimicrobial rationing in orthopaedic surgery.Bone & joint research · 2020Article
- A novel antimicrobial coating to prevent periprosthetic joint infection.Bone & joint research · 2020Article
- Synovial Fluid Interleukin-16 Contributes to Osteoclast Activation and Bone Loss through the JNK/NFATc1 Signaling Cascade in Patients with Periprosthetic Joint Infection.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe optimal protocol for antibiotic loading in the articulating cement spacers for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains controversial. The objective of the present study was to investigate the effectiveness of articulating cement spacers loaded with a new combination of antibiotics.
methodsA retrospective cohort study involving 114 PJI cases treated with implantation of an articulating cement spacer between 2005 and 2016 was performed. The treatment outcomes of the conventional protocol (i.e. gentamicin and vancomycin (GV protocol)) were compared with those reported using the sophisticated antibiotic-loading protocol (i.e. vancomycin, meropenem, and amphotericin (VMA protocol)).
resultsThere were 62 and 52 PJI cases treated with the GV and VMA protocols, respectively. Antimicrobial susceptibility testing revealed that 22/78 of all isolates (28.2%) in this series were resistant to gentamicin, whereas there were no vancomycin-, meropenem-, or amphotericin-resistant strains. The overall infection recurrence rates were 17.7% (11/62) and 1.9% (1/52), respectively (p = 0.006). In patients with a negative preoperative culture, there was no infection recurrence reported in the VMA cohort (0/45 (0%)
conclusionThe sophisticated VMA protocol for the loading of antibiotics in articulating cement spacers, as part of a two-stage exchange, was associated with a reduced rate of infection recurrence. This proposed protocol appears to be safe and effective, especially in patients with negative culture results prior to the first-stage operation.Cite this article:
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.