SynthesisArchives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery2024
Identifying potential predictive indicators for reimplantation timing in two-stage revision: a meta-analysis and system review.
Synthesis in Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT07358455 (Identification of Pre-prosthetic Revision Markers Predictive of Outcome in Patients With Periprosthetic Infection), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Identification of Pre-prosthetic Revision Markers Predictive of Outcome in Patients With Periprosthetic Infection
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe two-stage exchange revision represents a pivotal strategy in the management of prosthetic joint infections, wherein the judicious timing of reimplantation serves as a crucial determinant for therapeutic success. At present, attempts have been made to utilize predictive models to establish the optimal timing for reimplantation; however, their predictive accuracy remains unsatisfactory. This inadequacy primarily arises from the lack of dependable predictive indicators, which demonstrate inconsistent effectiveness across various studies and occasionally yield contradictory outcomes. Therefore, identifying solid predictive indicators is in desperate need.
methodsStudies reporting outcomes of the two-stage exchange revision till June, 2023 were systematically retrieved, screened and subject to quality analysis. Basic characteristics of these studies were firstly summarized. Subsequently, factors of interest regarding clinical information, blood and body fluid test results, pathogen test results of the recurrent and recurrent-free cohorts were extracted and submitted to a fixed or random effects model. Meanwhile, evaluation of publication bias and sensitivity was performed.
resultsAfter filtering, a total of 45 studies were finally involved. Pooled analysis suggested that the recurrent cohort exhibited elevated incidences of body mass index (BMI) > 30, smoking and alcohol habits, diabetes, sinus tract, positive culture, and G
conclusionTo sum up, BMI > 30, smoking and alcohol habits, diabetes, sinus tract, positive culture, and G-, polymicrobial and drug-resistant infections, CRP, ESR, synovial WBC and PMN% exhibited significant differences between recurrent and recurrent-free cohorts. Therefore, these indicators may be considered as potential predictive factors for the further development of a prognostic model that aids the determination of reimplantation timing. Nevertheless, the efficacy of these indicators remains to be further confirmed. REGISTRATION NUMBER: Prospero ID: CRD42022296568.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39714508What 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.