ArticleJournal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology2026
Partial versus full revision in cementless single-stage exchange for hip periprosthetic joint infection: a multicenter comparative study with 10-year survivorship analysis.
Article in Journal of orthopaedics and traumatology : official journal of the Italian Society of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
backgroundPeriprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most challenging complications following total hip arthroplasty (THA). Traditional management typically involves full revision to ensure comprehensive infection eradication. However, for patients with well-fixed implants, partial revision in a single-stage cementless approach may provide a viable alternative, potentially preserving bone stock and reducing operative time. The relative efficacy of this approach compared with full revision remains to be fully explored. This multicenter study aims to determine whether partial revision in cementless single-stage exchange surgery offers comparable infection control outcomes to full revision for select patients with well-fixed implants.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective, multicenter cohort study involving 226 patients who underwent cementless single-stage exchange hip arthroplasty for PJI between 1 October 2013 and 31 July 2022. Patients were divided into partial revision (n = 61) and full revision (n = 165) groups. The primary outcome was treatment success, defined as the absence of clinical symptoms and signs of infection at a minimum follow-up of 2 years.
resultsThe success rates were 77.0% for the partial revision group and 80.0% for the full revision group, with no significant difference (p = 0.629). Both groups showed comparable 10-year survival rates for overall success and infection-free status. Patients with partial revision had significantly shorter operative times (137.3 versus 169.1 min, p < 0.001). Age ≥ 65 years (odds ratios (OR): 2.433, p = 0.003), American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) score ≥ 3 (OR: 1.778, p = 0.030), and chronic kidney disease (OR: 3.467, p = 0.053) were identified as independent risk factors for reinfection in the partial revision group.
conclusionsPartial cementless single-stage revision may offer comparable infection control to full revision in selected hip PJI cases with well-fixed implants, while reducing operative time. Given the retrospective design, these findings should be interpreted with caution, and future prospective studies are needed to confirm long-term outcomes, assess implant survival, and evaluate functional recovery.
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.