ArticleArthroplasty today2025
Timing-specific Debridement, Antibiotics, and Implant Retention and 2-Stage Revision for Megaprosthesis-Related Infection: Optimizing the Window Period for Improved Outcomes.
Article in Arthroplasty today, 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 factors for periprosthetic joint infection following primary total knee arthroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) procedures and 2-stage revision surgeries in patients with periprosthetic joint infection following megaprosthesis, including treatment failure; the patient-reported outcomes; and to determine the survival rates of the revised megaprosthesis. Methods: A retrospective study of 30 patients diagnosed with periprosthetic joint infection following megaprosthesis between 2018 and 2023, with minimum 1-year follow-up. Patients with previous unsuccessful debridement in other institutions were excluded. Patients presenting within 4 weeks of megaprosthesis implantation underwent the DAIR procedure, while those presenting after this window were taken for a 2-stage revision surgery. The primary outcome was treatment failure, defined as persistent wound complication or the need for subsequent surgical intervention. The secondary outcomes included patient-reported outcomes, assessed with the Oxford Hip Score and Oxford Knee Score, and the survival rates of the revised megaprosthesis. Results: The mean follow-up duration for all patients was 38 ± 12.6 months. Improvement was found for Oxford Hip Score and Oxford Knee Score with mean 34.22 ± 9.2 and 32.40 ± 8.1, respectively, at the 1-year follow-up. DAIR achieved an 81% success rate (13 out of 16) and 2-stage exchange had a 71.4% success rate (10 out of 14). Conclusions: Both DAIR and 2-stage exchange procedures yielded favorable functional outcomes with satisfactory 2-year survival function. Careful patient selection and indication management are crucial for optimal results. Level of evidence: Level 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.