Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35403987›Full record

ArticleJournal of experimental orthopaedics2022

Debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention in non-oncological femoral megaprosthesis infections: minimum 5 year follow-up.

A Asokan, M S Ibrahim, J W Thompson, F S Haddad

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of experimental orthopaedics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.2field-weighted citation impact, top 13% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. 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

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

A AsokanDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, University College Hospital, 235 Euston Road, Fitzrovia, London, NW1 2BU, UK. ajay.asokan@nhs.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1351-5401
M S IbrahimDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, University College Hospital, 235 Euston Road, Fitzrovia, London, NW1 2BU, UK.
J W ThompsonDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, University College Hospital, 235 Euston Road, Fitzrovia, London, NW1 2BU, UK.
F S HaddadDepartment of Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery, University College Hospital, 235 Euston Road, Fitzrovia, London, NW1 2BU, UK.
University College Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeMegaprostheses are increasingly utilised outside of the oncological setting, and remain at significant risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Debridement, antibiotic, and implant retention (DAIR) is an established treatment for PJI, however its use in non-oncological patients with femoral megaprostheses has not been widely reported. There are significant differences in patient physiology, treatment goals, and associated risks between these patient cohorts.

methodsWe identified 14 patients who underwent DAIR for a PJI of their femoral megaprostheses, between 2000 and 2014, whom had their index procedure secondary to non-oncological indications. Patients were managed as part of a multidisciplinary team, with our standardised surgical technique including exchange of all mobile parts, and subsequent antibiotic therapy for a minimum of 3 months. Patients were followed up for a minimum of 5 years.

resultsPatients included six proximal femoral replacements, five distal femoral replacements, and three total femoral replacements. No patients were lost to follow-up. There were six males and eight females, with a mean age of 67.2 years, and mean ASA of 2.3. Nine patients (64.3%) successfully cleared their infection following DAIR at a minimum of 5 year follow-up. Five patients (35.7%) required further revision surgery, with four patients cleared of infection. No patients who underwent DAIR alone suffered complications as a result of the procedure.

conclusionsThe use of DAIR in these complex patients can lead to successful outcomes, but the risk of further revision remains high. The success rate (64.3%) remains on par with other studies evaluating DAIR in megaprostheses and in primary arthroplasty. This study indicates judicious use of DAIR can be an appropriate part of the treatment algorithm. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: II.

Indexed as

AntibioticsDAIRDebridementImplant retentionMegaprosthesisPeriprosthetic infection

Identifiers

PMID35403987
PMCPMC9001793
OpenAlexW4223545845

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.