Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35054068›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022

Failure Analysis in Multiple TKA Revisions-Periprosthetic Infections Remain Surgeons' Nemesis.

Stephanie Kirschbaum, Sarah Erhart, Carsten Perka, Robert Hube, Kathi Thiele

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2022. 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. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

5 authors.

Stephanie KirschbaumCentre for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité-University Hospital Germany, 10117 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-8263-4354
Sarah ErhartCentre for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité-University Hospital Germany, 10117 Berlin, Germany.
Carsten PerkaCentre for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité-University Hospital Germany, 10117 Berlin, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-0993-581X
Robert HubeOrthopaedische Chirurgie Muenchen, OCM-Clinic, 81369 Munic, Germany.
Kathi ThieleCentre for Musculoskeletal Surgery, Charité-University Hospital Germany, 10117 Berlin, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe aim of this study was to categorize reasons for failure and to analyze the survivorship of multiple total knee arthroplasty (TKA) revisions.

methodsThe study retrospectively evaluated all multiple TKA revisions performed between 2005 and 2015 at the authors' institutions. Sixty-three patients (35 female, 28 male, age 64 ± 10 years, follow-up 55 ± 36 months) underwent a total of 157 re-revision TKA surgeries (range 2-5). The revision indications were divided up into main diagnoses. Survivorship was evaluated by mixed model analysis.

resultsThe main overall reason for re-revision was periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (48%), followed by instability (12%), polyethylene wear (11%), malpositioning (8%), and aseptic loosening (8%). Survivorship shortened with an increasing number of revision surgeries (

conclusionThe probability of survival of the implanted knee arthroplasty is significantly reduced with each subsequent revision. Periprosthetic infection is the main cause of multiple revisions.

Indexed as

multiple revisionsperiprosthetic joint infectionrevision knee arthroplastyrevision surgerysurvivorshiptotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID35054068
PMCPMC8779106

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.