ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2022
The Fate of Antibiotic Impregnated Cement Space in Treatment for Forefoot Osteomyelitis.
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. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Management of Chronic Septic Arthritis and Osteomyelitis Following Hallux Valgus Correction With Staged Antibiotic Cement Spacer and Subsequent Bulk Allograft Arthrodesis.Journal of the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons. Global research & reviews · 2026Article
- Revisiting Antibiotic-Impregnated Cement Spacer for Diabetic Osteomyelitis of the Foot.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- State-of-the-art update for diagnosing diabetic foot osteomyelitis: a narrative review.Journal of Yeungnam medical science · 2023Article
- Correction: Woo et al. The Fate of Antibiotic Impregnated Cement Space in Treatment for Forefoot Osteomyelitis.Journal of clinical medicine · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Forefoot osteomyelitis can be an extremely challenging problem in orthopedic surgery. Unlike conventional methods, such as amputations, antibiotic impregnated cement space (ACS) was recently introduced and perceived as a substitute for amputation. The purpose of this study was to compare clinical features between diabetic and non-diabetic groups and to evaluate the efficacy of ACS in the treatment of forefoot osteomyelitis, by identifying the clinical characteristics of ACS. We inserted ACS into the forefoot osteomyelitis patients and regularly checked up on them, then analyzed the clinical features of the patients and failure reasons, if ACS had to be removed. Average survival rate of ACS was 60% (21 out of 35 cases) and main failure reason was recurrence of infection. There was no significant clinical difference between diabetic and non-diabetic groups. We concluded that ACS could be a possible way of avoiding amputation if infection is under control. ACS seems to be an innovative method with promising results for foot osteomyelitis, but widely accepted indications need to be agreed upon.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.