SynthesisBMC musculoskeletal disorders2025
Unveiling the link: highly porous tantalum-augmented implants and periprosthetic joint infection in revision total knee arthroplasty-a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis in BMC musculoskeletal disorders, 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.
- Metaphyseal cones in septic revision total knee arthroplasty: A retrospective cohort study with minimum 2-year follow-up.Journal of experimental orthopaedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe trend of the literature suggests that tantalum (Ta) may possess antibacterial properties. However, no consensus has been reached on Ta's preventive role in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients undergoing revision total knee arthroplasty (rTKA). QUESTION: What is the PJI incidence rate after rTKA using Ta-augmented implants for both septic and all-cause revision reasons? Is there a difference in the PJI rate following rTKA performed using Ta-augmented implants compared to non-Ta implants?
methodsUsing 5 major databases, the authors searched for studies reporting the rate of PJIs following rTKA using Ta-augmented implants until January 2022. The PJI rates for the Ta group were pooled, compared to the control group, and presented as odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) using forest plots.
resultsThirty eligible studies involving 881 knees were included. The overall PJI rate following rTKA using Ta-augmented implants was 8.1% (CI = 6.6%-9.9%). Specifically, in cases of septic revision, the infection rate was 15.7% (95% CI = 11.7%-20.7%). The comparative analysis indicated a similar PJI rate between the Ta- augmented and non-Ta group across 3 studies, which was found to be similar (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.13-2.0, P = 0.35).
conclusionPJI poses a significant risk following both aseptic and septic revision rTKA, even when Ta-augmented implants were administrated. The rate of PJI after rTKA was similar for Ta- augmented implants and non-Ta implants. Further rigorous studies with a high level of evidence are essential to definitively determine the potential impact of Ta derivatives on infection rates following rTKA, particularly in septic revision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: IV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.