Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38723699›Full record

ArticleThe Journal of arthroplasty2024

The Infected Polypropylene Mesh: When Does Biofilm Form and Which Antiseptic Solution Most Effectively Removes It?

Suenghwan Jo, Christina Chao, Tyler K Khilnani, Aarti Shenoy, Mathias P G Bostrom, Alberto V Carli

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The Journal of arthroplasty, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing 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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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.

Suenghwan JoSchool of Medicine, Chosun University, Gwangju, South Korea.
Christina ChaoDepartment of Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.
Tyler K KhilnaniDepartment of Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.
Aarti ShenoyDepartment of Biomechanics, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.
Mathias P G BostromDepartment of Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.
Alberto V CarliDepartment of Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, New York.

Funding

Field Emission Scanning Electron MicroscopeS10OD026989 · OD · NEW YORK UNIVERSITY · PI BROMAGE, TIMOTHY G. · 2019 to 2019
$581k
NIH HHS S10 OD026989
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPolypropylene (PPE) mesh is commonly utilized to reconstruct catastrophic extensor mechanism disruptions in revision total knee arthroplasty. Unfortunately, these procedures are associated with a high rate of periprosthetic joint infection. The purpose of the current study was to: 1) visualize and quantify the progression of bacterial biofilm growth on PPE-mesh; and 2) determine which antiseptic solutions effectively remove viable bacteria.

methodsKnitted PPE mesh samples were cultured with either methicillin-sensitive Staphylococcus aureus (MSSA) or Escherichia coli (E. coli) for 7 days, with regular quantification of colony forming units (CFUs) and visualization using scanning electron microscopy to identify maturity. Immature (24 hour) and mature (72 hour) biofilm was treated with one of 5 commercial antiseptics for 3 minutes. A 0.05% chlorhexidine gluconate, a surfactant-based formulation of ethanol, acetic acid, sodium acetate, benzalkonium chloride, diluted povidone-iodine (0.35%), undiluted (10%) povidone-iodine, and 1:1 combination of 10% povidone-iodine and 3% hydrogen peroxide. A 3-log reduction in CFUs compared to saline was considered clinically meaningful.

resultsThe CFU counts plateaued, indicating maturity, at 72 hours for both MSSA and E. coli. The scanning electron microscopy confirmed confluent biofilm formation after 72 hours. The 10% povidone-iodine was clinically effective against all MSSA biofilms and immature E. coli biofilms. The 10% povidone-iodine with hydrogen peroxide was effective in all conditions. Only 10% povidone iodine formulations produced significantly (P < .0083) reduced CFU counts against mature biofilms.

conclusionsBacteria rapidly form biofilm on PPE mesh. Mesh contamination can be catastrophic, and clinicians should consider utilizing an antiseptic solution at the conclusion of mesh implantation. Undiluted povidone-iodine with hydrogen peroxide should be considered when attempting to salvage infected PPE mesh.

Indexed as

Anti-Infective Agents, LocalBiofilmsEscherichia coliPolypropylenesStaphylococcus aureusSurgical MeshChlorhexidineHumansMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningPovidone-IodineProsthesis-Related InfectionsAnti-Infective Agents, LocalChlorhexidinechlorhexidine gluconatePolypropylenesPovidone-Iodinebiofilmextensor mechanism reconstructionirrigation solutionsmeshpolypropylene

Identifiers

PMID38723699
PMCPMC12412129

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.