Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36068617›Full record

ReviewArthroplasty (London, England)2022

Patients at a high risk of PJI: Can we reduce the incidence of infection using dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement?

Christof Berberich, Jerôme Josse, Pablo Sanz Ruiz

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Arthroplasty (London, England), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

12 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Antimicrobial 3D printed implants for periprosthetic joint infections.Drug delivery and translational research · 2026
    Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. PeerJ · 2024
    Article
  8. [Bone cement as a local antibiotic carrier].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2023
    Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. 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

3 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Christof BerberichDepartment of Medical Training, Heraeus Medical GmbH, 612173, Wehrheim, Hessen, Germany. christof.berberich@heraeus.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5220-1889
Jerôme JosseInstitut Des Sciences Pharmaceutiques Et Biologiques de Lyon (ISPB), International Center for Research in Infectiology Inserm U1111, CNRS UMR5308, ENS de Lyon, UCBL1, 69008, Lyon, France.
Pablo Sanz RuizDepartment of Traumatology and Orthopedic Surgery, General University Hospital Gregorio Marañon, Madrid, Spain.
Heraeus (Germany) · DEUniversidad Complutense de Madrid · ESUniversité Claude Bernard Lyon 1 · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most devastating complications of orthopedic surgery. However, not all patients are equally at the risk of severe infection. The incidences of PJI vary with the host and surgery-related risk factors. It is now generally accepted that some important medical comorbidities may predispose the patients to a high risk of PJI. Time-consuming and invasive surgical procedures, such as revision arthroplasties, are also associated with a high incidence of PJI, presumably due to the increased risk of surgical site contamination. Effective infection-preventing strategies should begin with identifying and optimizing the patients at a high risk of infection prior to surgery. Optimizing the operating room environment and antibiotic prophylaxis are also essential strategies that help minimize the overall incidence of infection in orthopedic surgery. The ideal antibiotic prophylaxis is still under debate, and discussions have emerged about whether variations or adjustments to the standard protocol are justified in patients at a high risk of infection. This also includes evaluating the possible benefits and risks of using high-dose dual antibiotic-loaded bone cement instead of low-dose single antibiotic-loaded bone cement in arthroplasty. This review summarizes the evidence showing that the combination of two local antibiotics in bone cement exerts a strong and longer-lasting antimicrobial effect against PJI-associated pathogens. This conclusion is consistent with the preliminary clinical studies showing a low incidence of PJI in high-risk patients undergoing cemented hemiarthroplasty, cemented revision, and primary arthroplasty if dual ALBC is used. These results may encourage clinicians to consolidate this hypothesis in a wider clinical range.

Indexed as

Dual high-dose antibiotic-loaded bone cementInfection prophylaxisProsthetic joint infectionRisk factors for infectionSingle low-dose antibiotic-loaded bone cement

Identifiers

PMID36068617
PMCPMC9450350
OpenAlexW4295034781

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.