ArticleBone & joint open2025
Cementless one-stage hip revision arthroplasty with an injectable antibiotic bone graft substitute : a pilot study.
Article in Bone & joint open, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: The classic, widely accepted approach for one-stage hip revision arthroplasty in patients with periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the cemented exchange. This approach provides stable implant anchoring despite bone defects after removal of infected components, and facilitates local antibiotic delivery. This study aims to investigate the efficacy of cementless one-stage hip revision arthroplasty using a gentamicin-eluting bone graft substitute (GBGS) to address both bone defect filling and antibiotic elution. Methods: We conducted a prospective analysis of 20 patients with confirmed PJI undergoing cementless one-stage hip revision arthroplasty using GBGS. The GBGS was used to fill femoral and acetabular defects during implantation. Clinical outcomes, radiographs, adverse events, and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) including Harris Hip Score (HHS) and EuroQol five-dimension five-level questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L) were assessed. Patients received 12 weeks of systemic antibiotics and were followed up for at least 24 months. Results: The mean age of the cohort was 66.3 years (SD 8.4; 46 to 80), with ten female and ten male patients. On average, 13.2 ml (SD 3.9; 5 to 17) of GBGS was applied to bone defects. No reinfections occurred during the follow-up period of 3.3 years (SD 0.92; 2.1 to 4.8). We observed 15 serious adverse events (SAEs), none of which were associated with the product. All cases showed good bony consolidation and prosthesis integration at 12 months. Significant improvements were seen in HHS (preoperative mean: 47.7; final visit mean: 80.1; p < 0.001) and EQ-5D-5L score (preoperative mean: 0.43; 12-month mean: 0.88; p < 0.001). Conclusion: This prospective pilot study is the first to demonstrate the safety and feasibility of single-stage cementless hip exchange arthroplasty using GBGS in managing PJI and associated bone defects. The technique resulted in significant improvements in functional outcomes and quality of life, with a good safety profile. Further studies with larger cohorts are warranted to validate these findings.
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.