ArticleInternational orthopaedics2025
Strategies for periprosthetic joint infection management in resource-limited settings: the applicability of EBJIS criteria.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
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
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
background and purposePeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a significant and challenging healthcare issues. Accurate diagnosis is essential for effective treatment. The aim of our study is to underscore the usefulness of the new EBJIS definition and criteria when applied in a developing country department.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective analysis of a single-center cohort of consecutive revision arthroplasties (January 2018-June 2024). This study was carried out at the Department of Orthopedics and Trauma Surgery in the University Hospital Fattouma Bourguiba in Monastir, Tunisia. Were included in our research patients who underwent revision surgery for arthroplasties due to septic failure. Exclusion criteria were: surgery performed within the previous six weeks, antibiotic-loaded bone cement spacer in place, the second step of a two-stage revision and periprosthetic fractures.
resultsA total of 46 patients were included in the study. According to the EBJIS criteria, our cohort was divided into two groups: "likely infection" including 12 patients (26.1%) and "confirmed infection" with 34 patients (73.9%). Clinical signs like inflammation (Se 85.3%, PPV 76.32%) and pain (Se 76.47%, PPV 70.27%) demonstrate higher sensitivity but low specificity. Among paraclinical tests, a CRP level > 10 mg/dL is highly sensitive (97.06%), while PMN > 80% shows perfect specificity (100%). Tissue samples with more than two positives and cultures with the same microorganism exhibit high sensitivity (96.66% and 80%) and PPV (84.85% and 85.71%).
conclusionEstablishing PJI diagnosis is challenging and depends on paraclinical testing. We highlight the lack of important diagnostic instruments in settings with limited resources.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40053070What 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.