Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34909220›Full record

ReviewEFORT open reviews2021

EFORT recommendations for off-label use, mix & match and mismatch in hip and knee arthroplasty.

Keith Tucker, Klaus-Peter Günther, Per Kjaersgaard-Andersen, Jörg Lützner, Jan Philippe Kretzer, Rob G H H Nelissen, Toni Lange, Luigi Zagra

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in EFORT open reviews, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

8 authors.

Keith TuckerOrthopaedic Data Evaluation Panel (ODEP), Norwich, UK.
Klaus-Peter GüntherUniversity Centre of Orthopedics, Trauma and Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany.
Per Kjaersgaard-AndersenDepartment of Orthopaedics, Vejle Hospital, South Danish University, Vejle, Denmark.
Jörg LütznerUniversity Centre of Orthopedics, Trauma and Plastic Surgery, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus Dresden, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany.
Jan Philippe KretzerLaboratory of Biomechanics and Implant Research, Clinic for Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery, Heidelberg University Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany.
Rob G H H NelissenDepartment of Orthopaedics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1228-4162
Toni LangeCenter for Evidence-based Healthcare, University Hospital Carl Gustav Carus and Faculty of Medicine Carl Gustav Carus, Technische Universität Dresden, Germany.
Luigi ZagraIRCCS Istituto Ortopedico Galeazzi, Hip Department, Milan, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Off-label use is frequently practiced in primary and revision arthroplasty, as there may be indications for the application of implants for purposes outside the one the manufacturers intended.Under certain circumstances, patients may benefit from selective application of mix & match. This can refer to primary hip arthroplasty (if evidence suggests that the combination of devices from different manufacturers has superior results) and revision hip or knee arthroplasty (when the exchange of one component only is necessary and the invasiveness of surgery can be reduced).Within the EFORT 'Implant and Patient Safety Initiative', evidence- and consensus-based recommendations have been developed for the safe application of off-label use and mix & match in primary as well as revision hip and knee arthroplasty.Prior to the application of a medical device for hip or knee arthroplasty off-label and within a mix & match situation, surgeons should balance the risks and benefits to the patient, obtain informed consent, and document the decision process appropriately.Nevertheless, it is crucial for surgeons to only combine implants that are compatible. Mismatch of components, where their sizes or connections do not fit, may have catastrophic effects and is a surgical mistake.Surgeons must be fully aware of the features of the components that they use in off-label indications or during mix & match applications, must be appropriately trained and must audit their results.Considering the frequent practice of off-label and mix & match as well as the potential medico-legal issues, further research is necessary to obtain more data about the appropriate indications and outcomes for those procedures. Cite this article:

Indexed as

hip arthroplastyknee arthroplastymismatchmix & matchoff-label

Identifiers

PMID34909220
PMCPMC8631244

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.