Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38877723›Full record

ReviewJournal of perioperative practice

Additional doses of prophylactic antibiotics post-arthroplasty: Are there any benefits?

James Adeosun, Essam Rama, Azeem Thahir, Matija Krkovic

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of perioperative practice. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

James AdeosunSchool of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.
Essam RamaSchool of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3928-0575
Azeem ThahirCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3394-9418
Matija KrkovicCambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Cambridge, UK.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Guidelines for prophylactic antibiotic administration in total joint replacement vary considerably in terms of drug, dosage, route of administration and duration of cover. Despite the range of treatment options available, infection remains the most common reason for arthroplasty failure in the decades following a procedure, simultaneously increasing health care costs and lowering patient satisfaction considerably. This work aims to evaluate whether there are benefits to administering further doses of antibiotic post-arthroplasty, in addition to the recommendations of current protocols. We present a review of evidence surrounding infection rates in a variety of prophylactic regimens, and weigh this against further considerations such as cost to the patient and risks of nephrotoxicity. In summary, the available evidence does not suggest a benefit to administering additional doses post-arthroplasty in most cases. However, further doses may benefit those deemed at high risk of infection, or those in areas of high methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus prevalence.

Indexed as

Anti-Bacterial AgentsAntibiotic ProphylaxisArthroplasty, ReplacementProsthesis-Related InfectionsSurgical Wound InfectionHumansAnti-Bacterial AgentsAntibioticsArthroplastyHipInfectionKneeProphylaxis

Identifiers

PMID38877723
PMCPMC12202828

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.