Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34940945›Full record

SynthesisJournal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology2021

Antibiotic cement coating in orthopedic surgery: a systematic review of reported clinical techniques.

Abdullah Ismat, Nike Walter, Susanne Baertl, Joerg Mika, Siegmund Lang, Maximilian Kerschbaum, Volker Alt, Markus Rupp

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  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

8 authors.

Abdullah IsmatDepartment of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Nike WalterDepartment of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Susanne BaertlDepartment of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Joerg MikaExperimental Rheumatology Unit, Department of Orthopedics, Jena University Hospital, Waldkliniken Eisenberg GmbH, Klosterlausnitzer Strasse 81, 07607, Eisenberg, Germany.
Siegmund LangDepartment of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Maximilian KerschbaumDepartment of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Volker AltDepartment of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany.
Markus RuppDepartment of Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauß-Allee 11, 93053, Regensburg, Germany. Markus.rupp@ukr.de.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7221-3783

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAntibiotic-containing cement and bone graft substitute-coated orthopedic implants provide the advantages of simultaneous local antibiotic delivery and internal stable fixation, aiding in both infection eradication and osseous healing. Standardized protocols pertaining to implant coating techniques in various clinical and particularly intraoperative settings are scarce, and available literature is limited. This systematic review aims to provide a summary of the available current literature reporting on custom-made coating techniques of orthopedic implants, indications, outcomes, and associated complications in clinical use.

methodsA systematic search of the literature in PubMed, Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. Articles reporting specifically on custom-made coating techniques of orthopedic implants in a clinical setting were eligible.

resultsA total of 41 articles with a cumulative total number of 607 cases were included. Indications for treatment mostly involved intramedullary infections after previous plate osteosynthesis or nailing. A variety of implants ranging from intramedullary nails, plates, wires, and rods served as metal cores for coating. Polymethylmethacrylate (PMMA) bone cement was most commonly used, with vancomycin as the most frequently added antibiotic additive. Chest tubes and silicone tubes were most often used to mold. Common complications are cement debonding and breakage of the metallic implant.

conclusionAdequate coating techniques can reduce the burden of treatment and be associated with favorable outcomes. Lack of general consensus and heterogeneity in the reported literature indicate that the perfect all-in-one implant coating method is yet to be found. Further efforts to improve implant coating techniques are warranted. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: III.

Indexed as

Bone CementsFracture Fixation, IntramedullaryAnti-Bacterial AgentsBone PlatesBone WiresHumansAnti-Bacterial AgentsBone CementsBone cement coatingImplant coatingOsteomyelitisOsteosynthesis

Identifiers

PMID34940945
PMCPMC8702599

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.