ArticleInternational orthopaedics2026
The impact of surgical timing on reoperation after arthroscopic versus open treatment of acute native knee septic arthritis.
Article in International orthopaedics, 2026. 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.
- Letter to the editor: The impact of surgical timing on reoperation after arthroscopic versus open treatment of acute native knee septic arthritis.International orthopaedics · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo investigate the effect of surgical timing and surgical technique on reoperation rates and early clinical outcomes in acute native knee septic arthritis.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included adult patients who underwent surgical treatment for acute native knee septic arthritis between 2018 and 2025. Patients were treated with either arthroscopic or open debridement according to the treating surgeon's assessment. Time from symptom onset to surgery was recorded in hours, and an a priori defined 48-h threshold was used to classify early versus delayed lavage. All cases received standardized joint irrigation with nine L of normal saline. The primary outcome was the need for reoperation due to persistent or recurrent infection. Secondary outcomes included knee range of motion at discharge and length of hospital stay. Culture-positive cases were analyzed separately. Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify independent predictors of reoperation.
resultsA total of 129 patients were included (mean age 58.3 ± 12.3 years; 62.8% male). Baseline demographic and comorbidity characteristics were similar between surgical technique groups; however, early lavage was more frequent in the arthroscopy group (p < 0.001). In early lavage cases, reoperation rates did not differ between arthroscopy and arthrotomy (p = 0.432). In delayed lavage cases, arthroscopy was associated with a significantly higher reoperation rate compared to arthrotomy (p < 0.001). Arthroscopy resulted in greater postoperative range of motion across all subgroups (p < 0.001). Length of hospital stay was shorter with arthroscopy in early lavage but longer in delayed lavage. Early lavage was independently associated with a reduced risk of reoperation (OR 0.02; 95% CI 0.00-0.10; p < 0.001).
conclusionIn acute native knee septic arthritis, our findings suggest that surgical timing may influence the relative outcomes of arthroscopic and open treatment. Early arthroscopic lavage may provide functional advantages without increasing the risk of reoperation, whereas delayed arthroscopy may be associated with higher reoperation rates. Prospective studies are warranted to confirm these observations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41824053What 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.