ArticleJournal of orthopaedic case reports2026
Intrawound Vancomycin and Povidone-Iodine Treatment to Reduce Infection Rates in Arthroplasty.
Article in Journal of orthopaedic case reports, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Patients of all age groups undergoing arthroplasty surgeries can develop surgical site infection after operation, which represents a major source of patient harm. Intrawound vancomycin and irrigation with dilute povidone-iodine is a potential prophylactic measure to prevent infection; thus, this prospective clinical observational study was done to evaluate its efficacy. Materials and Methods: Patients who underwent arthroplasty surgeries (total knee arthroplasty, total hip arthroplasty, hip bipolar hemiarthroplasty) at one specialist tertiary care center, from October 2020 to October 2022, were included in our study. Patients <18 years of age and known cases of vancomycin allergy were excluded from the study. These were the inclusion and exclusion criteria in our study. Participants were split into two groups: Group 1, vancomycin povidone-iodine protocol (VPIP) not initiated, and Group 2, VPIP initiated. The period of follow-up was 6 weeks, and the primary outcome under consideration was wound healing. After 6 weeks, patients in both groups were assessed using the ASEPSIS wound score, assigned to a category of infection, and the results compared between the groups. Results: Mean ASEPSIS scores in Groups 1 and 2 were 4.46 (±7.6) and 1.17 (±3.7), respectively, while overall infection rates were 5.8% and 0.8%. The chance of developing infection was 11-fold higher in Group 1 patients than those in Group 2, which was a highly significant difference (adjusted odds ratio = 11.651; 95% confidence interval, 1.27-106.76; P < 0.05). The likelihood of developing an infection was significantly higher among individuals with diabetes mellitus (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Use of the VPIP in patients undergoing arthroplasty generated good results, indicating that it is a good infection prevention measure. Additional randomized controlled trials are needed to assess the effectiveness of this method and ascertain whether its extensive utilization is justified.
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.