Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33076900›Full record

ArticleBMC musculoskeletal disorders2020

Evaluation of the standard procedure for the treatment of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) in Germany - results of a survey within the EndoCert initiative.

Christina Rimke, Andreas Enz, Hermann Josef Bail, Peter Heppt, Bernd Kladny, Gabriela von Lewinski, Christoph H Lohmann, Katrin Osmanski-Zenk, Holger Haas, Wolfram Mittelmeier

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 19 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. [Bone cement as a local antibiotic carrier].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023
    Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Preparation and PET/CT imaging of implant directedJournal of nanobiotechnology · 2023
    Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. 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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 1 country.

Christina RimkeOrthopädische Klinik und Poliklinik, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Doberaner Straße 142, 18059, Rostock, Germany.
Andreas EnzOrthopädische Klinik und Poliklinik, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Doberaner Straße 142, 18059, Rostock, Germany. andreas.enz@med.uni-rostock.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-9258-487X
Hermann Josef BailKlinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Klinikum Nürnberg Süd, Universitätsklinik der Paracelsus Medizinischen Privatuniversität Nürnberg, Breslauer Straße 201, 90471, Nuremberg, Germany.
Peter HepptOCE Orthopädie Centrum Erlangen, Nägelsbachstraße 49A, 91052, Erlangen, Germany.
Bernd KladnyM&I Fachklinik Herzogenaurach, In der Reuth 1, 91074, Herzogenaurach, Germany.
Gabriela von LewinskiKlinik für Unfallchirurgie, Orthopädie und Plastische Chirurgie, Universitätsmedizin Göttingen, Robert-Koch-Straße 40, 37075, Goettingen, Germany.
Christoph H LohmannOrthopädische Universitätsklinik, Otto-von-Guericke Universität Magdeburg, Leipziger Str. 44, 39120, Magdeburg, Germany.
Katrin Osmanski-ZenkOrthopädische Klinik und Poliklinik, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Doberaner Straße 142, 18059, Rostock, Germany.
Holger HaasAllgemeine Orthopädie, Unfallchirurgie und Sportmedizin, Gemeinschaftskrankenhaus St Elisabeth St Petrus St Johannes gGmbH, Haus St. Petrus / Bonner Talweg 4-6, 53113, Bonn, Germany.
Wolfram MittelmeierOrthopädische Klinik und Poliklinik, Universitätsmedizin Rostock, Doberaner Straße 142, 18059, Rostock, Germany.
Universitätsmedizin Rostock · DEKrankenhaus St. Elisabeth und St. Barbara · DENuremberg Hospital · DEOrthopädische Universitätsklinik · DEUniversitätsmedizin Göttingen · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a severe complication in the field of arthroplasty. Despite the rising number of primary joint replacements, no unified therapeutic standard has been established for the treatment of PJI yet.

methodsA survey on the principles of treatment of PJI in Germany was conducted. A total of 515 EndoProthetikZentren (EPZ) were included, resulting in a response rate of 100%.

resultsFor early infections 97.6% of the centers use prosthesis-preserving procedures (DAIR). A one-stage exchange was implemented by less than 50% of the centers. If implemented, this treatment entails a prior selection of patients for a successful treatment. The two-stage exchange is performed in all centers, and most centers proceed with the implantation of a cemented spacer between stages. 75% of the centers proceed with a center-based concept for the treatment of PJI.

conclusionThe aim of a uniform PJI standard at the centers has not yet been fully achieved. Further improvements within the certification were initiated. The most relevant treatment options in Germany are displayed. The two-stage revision with a cemented spacer is the most widely implemented treatment. This exposition of principles could help for the further development of standardized treatment guidelines and definitions.

Indexed as

Prosthesis-Related InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsDebridementGermanyHumansReoperationRetrospective StudiesAnti-Bacterial AgentsCertificationIncident reportingPeriprosthetic joint infectionRevision arthroplastySurveysTwo-stage revision

Identifiers

PMID33076900
PMCPMC7574524
OpenAlexW3093242688

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.