ArticleArthroplasty (London, England)2024
Increased risk of periprosthetic joint infection after traumatic injury in joint revision patients.
Article in Arthroplasty (London, England), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Editorial: Challenges and advances in revision total joint arthroplasty.Arthroplasty (London, England) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication after total joint arthroplasty (TJA). Although some risk factors of PJI were well studied, the association between trauma and PJI remains unknown in revision patients. MATERIALS AND
methodsBetween 2015 and 2018, a total of 71 patients with trauma history before revisions (trauma cohort) were propensity score matched (PSM) at a ratio of 1 to 5 with a control cohort of revision patients without a history of trauma. Then, the cumulative incidence rate of PJI within 3 years after operation between the two groups was compared. The secondary endpoints were aseptic revisions within 3 postoperative years, complications up to 30 postoperative days, and readmission up to 90 days. During a minimal 3-year follow-up, the survival was comparatively analyzed between the trauma cohort and the control cohort.
resultsThe cumulative incidence of PJI was 40.85% in patients with trauma history against 27.04% in the controls (P = 0.02). Correspondingly, the cumulative incidence of aseptic re-revisions was 12.68% in patients with trauma history compared with 5.07% in the control cohort (P = 0.028). Cox regression revealed that trauma history was a risk factor of PJI (HR, 1.533 [95%CI, (1.019,2.306)]; P = 0.04) and aseptic re-revisions (HR, 3.285 [95%CI, (1.790,6.028)]; P < 0.0001).
conclusionsOur study demonstrated that revision patients with trauma history carried a higher risk of PJI compared to those without trauma history. Moreover, after revisions, the trauma patients were still at higher risk for treatment failure due to PJI, periprosthetic joint fracture, and mechanical complications.
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.