ArticleInternational orthopaedics2024
Outcomes of rotating versus pure hinge knee arthroplasty in the setting of one-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- 3D-printed prothesis combined hinged knee arthroplasty in the treatment of critical-sized osteomyelitis-derived bone defects around the knee joint.BMC musculoskeletal disorders · 2026Article
- Applying 3D-Printed Porous Ti6Al4V Prostheses to Repair Osteomyelitis-Induced Partial Bone Defects of Lower Limbs: Finite Element Analysis and Clinical Outcomes.Orthopaedic surgery · 2025Article
- Clinical outcomes of two-stage revision arthroplasty using a spiked tibial cement spacer in infected total knee arthroplasty.International orthopaedics · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeRotating or pure hinge knee prostheses are often used in case of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Five-year survival data of rotating hinge implants ranging from 52 to 90%, whereas pure hinge data are sparse. This study describes the results of both hinge knee prostheses after one-stage septic exchange.
methodsOne hundred sixty-seven one-stage septic exchanges of a primary unconstrained total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to a cemented hinge prosthesis (117 rotating and 50 pure hinge TKAs) performed between 2008 and 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Exclusion criteria were stem extensions or augments used in primary TKA, history of extensor mechanism reconstruction, and a follow-up less than two years after surgery. Rates of reinfection, mechanical failures, and all-cause revision-free survival data were documented.
resultsAt five years, the all-cause revision-free survival was 77% (95% CI 69 to 82). Thirty-one patients (19%) had further revision for aseptic reasons. In the rotating hinge group, the mechanical failure rate was more than twice as high as in the pure hinge group (13% vs 6%), significantly influenced by higher body weight. At a mean follow-up of 6.7 years, 21 (13%) patients had a reinfection and underwent a further surgery. Reinfection rates did not differ between the two groups.
conclusionThe use of hinge TKA in the revision of PJI shows favourable five year infection-free and all-cause revision-free survival rates of 91% and 77%, respectively. Our study showed poorer results of the rotating hinge design. These results may help surgeons to choose proper implants in case of septic knee revision.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38558190What 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.