Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38298809›Full record

ArticleArthroplasty today2024

Does Using Highly Porous Tantalum in Revision Total Hip Arthroplasty Reduce the Rate of Periprosthetic Joint Infection? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Peyman Mirghaderi, Nasim Eshraghi, Erfan Sheikhbahaei, Mohammadreza Razzaghof, Kiarash Roustai-Geraylow, Alireza Pouramini, Mohammad Mirahmadi Eraghi, Fatemeh Kafi, Sayed Mohammad Javad Mortazavi

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Arthroplasty today, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.9field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 5 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. 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

9 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Peyman MirghaderiSurgical Research Society (SRS), Students' Scientific Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Nasim EshraghiSurgical Research Society (SRS), Students' Scientific Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Erfan SheikhbahaeiSurgical Research Society (SRS), Students' Scientific Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammadreza RazzaghofJoint Reconstruction Research Center (JRRC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Kiarash Roustai-GeraylowSurgical Research Society (SRS), Students' Scientific Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Alireza PouraminiSurgical Research Society (SRS), Students' Scientific Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Mohammad Mirahmadi EraghiSurgical Research Society (SRS), Students' Scientific Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Fatemeh KafiSurgical Research Society (SRS), Students' Scientific Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Sayed Mohammad Javad MortazaviJoint Reconstruction Research Center (JRRC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Tehran University of Medical Sciences · IR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Studies suggest tantalum (Ta) implants may have inherent antibacterial properties. However, there is no consensus regarding the effectiveness of Ta in preventing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). Methods: We searched 5 main databases for articles reporting the rate of PJI following rTHA using Ta implants from inception to February 2022. The PJI rates of the Ta group were meta-analyzed, compared with the control group, and represented as relative risks (RRs) in forest plots. Results: We identified 67 eligible studies (28,414 joints) for assessing the prevalence of PJI following rTHA using Ta implants. Among these studies, only 9 compared the Ta implant group with a control group. The overall PJI rate following rTHA using Ta implants was 2.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.2%-3.8%), while it was 5.7% (95% CI = 4.1%-7.8%) if only septic revisions were considered. Comparing the Ta and control groups showed a significantly lower PJI rate following all-cause rTHA with an RR = 0.80 (95% CI = 0.65-0.98, Conclusions: Ta implants are associated with a lower PJI rate following all-cause rTHA but not after septic causes. Despite positive results, the clinical significance of Ta still remains unclear since the PJI rate was only reduced by 20%. Level of Evidence: IV.

Indexed as

ArthroplastyHipPJIProsthesis-related infectionsTantalum

Identifiers

PMID38298809
PMCPMC10827600
OpenAlexW4391065462

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.