Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38529148›Full record

ReviewAnnals of joint2022

Two stage revision: indications, techniques and results.

Massimo Franceschini, Leopoldo Pedretti, Vincenzo Cerbone, Nemandra Amir Sandiford

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Annals of joint, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
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

4 authors.

Massimo FranceschiniIstituto Ortopedico "G. Pini", II Orthopaedic Clinic, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Leopoldo PedrettiIstituto Ortopedico "G. Pini", II Orthopaedic Clinic, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Vincenzo CerboneIstituto Ortopedico "G. Pini", II Orthopaedic Clinic, University of Milan, Milan, Italy.
Nemandra Amir SandifordJoint Reconstruction Unit, Southland Hospital, Invercargill, New Zealand.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most challenging complications a surgeon has to face after prosthetic replacement of a joint and one of the most devastating complications for the patient. During the 2018 International Consensus Meeting (ICM) in Philadelphia a numerical diagnostic tool was proposed. Contraindications to single stage revision include significant soft tissue injury with the inability to provide soft tissue cover, the presence of unknown or multi resistant organisms, lack of access to appropriate antibiotics or lack of appropriate expertise. Two stage revision surgery is indicated in these situations. Insall

Indexed as

infectionjointPeriprostheticrevisiontwo stage

Identifiers

PMID38529148
PMCPMC10929304

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.