Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32889672›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2021

Silver-coated megaprosthesis in prevention and treatment of peri-prosthetic infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis about efficacy and toxicity in primary and revision surgery.

Michele Fiore, Andrea Sambri, Riccardo Zucchini, Claudio Giannini, Davide Maria Donati, Massimiliano De Paolis

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed
13.7field-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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 96 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michele FioreIRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via G.C. Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy. michele.fiore@ior.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0546-670X
Andrea SambriAzienda ospedaliera Sant'Orsola Malpighi, Bologna, Italy.
Riccardo ZucchiniIRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via G.C. Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Claudio GianniniIRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via G.C. Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Davide Maria DonatiIRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli, Via G.C. Pupilli 1, 40136, Bologna, Italy.
Massimiliano De PaolisAzienda ospedaliera Sant'Orsola Malpighi, Bologna, Italy.
Istituto Ortopedico Rizzoli · ITIRCCS Azienda Ospedliero-Universitaria di Bologna Policlinico di Sant'Orsola · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimProsthetic joint infection (PJI) is a common complication following orthopedic megaprosthetic implantations (EPR), estimated up to 50%. Silver coatings were introduced in order to reduce the incidence of PJI, by using the antibacterial activity of silver. Three different silver coatings are available: MUTARS

methodsThrough an electronic systematic search, we reviewed the articles concerning silver-coated EPRs. Infection rate, silver-related complications, local and blood concentrations of the silver were evaluated. Meta-analyses were performed to compare results from each study included.

resultsNineteen studies were included. The overall infection rate in patients with silver-coated implants was 17.6% (133/755). Overall infection rate in primary silver-coated EPR was been 9.2% (44/445), compared to 11.2% (57/507) of non-silver-coated implants. The overall infection rate after revisions was 13.7% (25/183) in patients with silver-coated EPR and 29.2% (47/161) when uncoated EPR were used, revealing a strength statistically significative utility of silver coatings in preventing infections in this group (p: 0.019). Generally, the use of MUTARS

conclusionsSilver-coated EPRs are safe and effective in reduction in PJI and re-infection rate, in particular when used in higher risk patients and after two-stage revisions to fight PJI.

Indexed as

Arthritis, InfectiousProsthesis-Related InfectionsHumansProstheses and ImplantsReoperationSilverSilverArgyriaInfectionMegaprosthesisSilver coating

Identifiers

PMID32889672
OpenAlexW3083278208

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.