Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37160445›Full record

ArticleArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2023

Indications and techniques for non-articulating spacers in massive bone loss following prosthetic knee joint infection: a scoping review.

Jonas P Sina, Shiraz A Sabah, Daniel Schrednitzki, Andrew J Price, Thomas W Hamilton, Abtin Alvand

Abstract readScoping Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Jonas P SinaNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Old Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK. jonas.sina@ndorms.ox.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7798-3306
Shiraz A SabahNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Old Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2401-1372
Daniel SchrednitzkiDepartment of Orthopaedic Surgery, Sana Kliniken, Sommerfeld, Germany.
Andrew J PriceNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Old Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4258-5866
Thomas W HamiltonNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Old Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6852-3834
Abtin AlvandNuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences (NDORMS), University of Oxford, Botnar Research Centre, Old Road, Oxford, OX3 7LD, UK.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6069-978X
Nuffield Orthopaedic Centre · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionProsthetic joint infection (PJI) is a destructive complication of knee replacement surgery (KR). In two-stage revision a spacer is required to maintain limb length and alignment and provide a stable limb on which to mobilise. Spacers may be articulating or static with the gold standard spacer yet to be defined. The aims of this scoping review were to summarise the types of static spacer used to treat PJI after KR, their indications for use and early complication rates.

methodsWe conducted a scoping review based on the Joanna Briggs Institute's "JBI Manual for Evidence Synthesis" Scoping review reported following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched from 2005 to 2022 for studies on the use of static spacers for PJI after KR.

results41 studies (1230 patients/knees) were identified describing 42 static spacer constructs. Twenty-three (23/42 [54.2%]) incorporated cement augmented with metalwork, while nineteen (19/42, [45.9%]) were made of cement alone. Spacers were most frequently anchored in the diaphysis (22/42, [53.3%]), particularly in the setting of extensive bone loss (mean AORI Type = F3/T3; 11/15 studies 78.3% diaphyseal anchoring). 7.1% (79 of 1117 knees) of static spacers had a complication requiring further surgery prior to planned second stage with the most common complication being infection (86.1%).

conclusionsThis study has summarised the large variety in static spacer constructs used for staged revision KR for PJI. Static spacers were associated with a high risk of complications and further work in this area is required to improve the quality of care in this vulnerable group.

Indexed as

Arthritis, InfectiousArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeKnee ProsthesisProsthesis-Related InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsHumansKnee JointProstheses and ImplantsReoperationRetrospective StudiesTreatment OutcomeAnti-Bacterial AgentsBone lossNon-articulating spacerPeriprosthetic joint infectionRevision knee replacementTreatment failureTwo-stage revision

Identifiers

PMID37160445
OpenAlexW4376104956

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.