ArticleInternational orthopaedics2025
Intra-wound vancomycin powder is cost-saving in primary total hip and knee arthroplasty.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Risk of surgical site infection associated with intraoperative smartphone use in a sterile cover during total knee arthroplasty.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThis study seeks to explore whether intra-wound vancomycin powder (IVP) is a cost-effective adjunct to standard of care (SOC) in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) from a US payor perspective.
methodsA decision-analytic model in the form of a decision tree was developed to compare the cost and outcomes of IVP with those of SOC in preventing periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) in TJA patients. The base case analysis assumes a hypothetical practice with an equal volume (50/50) of THA and TKA procedures in both the IVP + SOC and the SOC arm. Cost and clinical effectiveness data were obtained from published literature. Sensitivity and threshold analyses were used to estimate how changing inputs would impact the cost-effectiveness of IVP.
resultsDeterministic results found that in the base case model, IVP as an adjunct to SOC generates a cost saving of $260.38/patient. In scenario analysis, where THA and TKA procedures were separated, the estimated cost saving was $241.50/patient and $279.27/patient, respectively. Break-even analysis showed that the cost of IVP per patient would need to be $244.82-$282.59, or the PJI relative risk (RR) be approximately 0.99. Probabilistic analysis found IVP + SOC was cost-saving in 99.26% of the 10,000 iterations in the base case model.
conclusionApplying local vancomycin as an adjunct to SOC in primary TJA is not just cost effective, but cost-saving in reducing PJIs, saving an average of $260.38/patient. Depending on individual institution/practice infection rates and revision surgery costs, local vancomycin administration for primary TJA should be considered.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40107989What 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.