Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40160343›Full record

ArticleOpen forum infectious diseases2025

Good Results for PJI Caused by

Ana Trebše, Samo Roškar, Anže Mihelič, Rihard Trebše

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Open forum infectious diseases, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Trial
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.

Ana TrebšeUniversity Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0007-3986-9669
Samo RoškarValdoltra Orthopaedic Hospital, Ankaran, Slovenia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3314-0339
Anže MiheličValdoltra Orthopaedic Hospital, Ankaran, Slovenia.
Rihard TrebšeValdoltra Orthopaedic Hospital, Ankaran, Slovenia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1075-3351

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Methods: From the institutional bone infection registry, 44 patients treated for CPJI between 2007 and 2023 were identified. CPJIs were divided into 2 groups according to the isolated microbes: monomicrobial (14 [32%]) and polymicrobial (30 [68%]). Patients were treated with debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR; 14 [32%]) or with 1- or 2-stage implant exchange (reimplantation group; 30 [68%]). In 13 (30%) cases, antibiotic combination with rifampicin was used. Results: Out of 44 patients, 4 required further treatment. In monomicrobial CPJI, the treatment course was successful in all patients, whereas in polymicrobial CPJI it was successful in 87%. Antibiotic combination including rifampicin was used in 4 monomicrobial cases (29%) and 9 polymicrobial (30%) cases. In the polymicrobial group, DAIR was successful in 90% (9/10), while the reimplantation group had an 85% (17/20) success rate. Conclusions: In contrast with the previously published papers on CPJI, the results in our cohort were good, with the total cure rate being 91%. The cure rate was slightly lower in the polymicrobial group compared with the monomicrobial: 87% and 100%, respectively. Surgical therapy according to the established institutional algorithm resulted in a high success rate.

Indexed as

algorithmic approachcorynebacterial infectionsprosthetic joint infectionstotal hip arthroplastytotal joint arthroplastytotal knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID40160343
PMCPMC11953024

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.