MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765500831 · doi:10.1016/j.arthro.2017.07.038

Arthroscopic Management of Septic Arthritis of the Native Shoulder: A Systematic Review

2017· review· en· W2765500831 on OpenAlexaff
Muzammil Memon, Jeffrey Kay, Lydia Ginsberg, Darren de, Nicole Simunovic, Kristian Samuelsson, George S. Athwal, Olufemi R. Ayeni

Bibliographic record

VenueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related Surgery · 2017
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOrthopedic Infections and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt Joseph's Health CareWestern UniversityMcMaster UniversityMcMaster University Medical Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSeptic arthritisRange of motionSurgeryArthroscopyErythrocyte sedimentation rateAvascular necrosisArthritisPhysical therapyInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

PURPOSE: To investigate arthroscopic management of native shoulder joint septic arthritis-specifically, indications, patient outcomes, and complications. METHODS: PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were used to search the literature, and data abstraction was performed independently and in duplicate. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) checklist guided reporting and data abstraction. The quality of all included studies was assessed with the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies (MINORS) criteria. The results are presented in a narrative summary fashion using descriptive statistics including means, proportions, ranges, κ values, and intraclass correlation coefficient values. RESULTS: Overall, 27 studies (19 case reports and 8 case series) were identified, including 115 patients (121 shoulders). The mean follow-up period was 29.1 months (range, 1-199 months). The indications for shoulder arthroscopy owing to infection included pain; limited range of motion; swelling, erythema, and tenderness; fever; elevated leukocyte count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and/or C-reactive protein level; synovial aspirate findings; and/or imaging findings. Overall, 46 patients (40%) achieved infection eradication and functional improvement after a single arthroscopic procedure. However, 43 patients (37%) had ongoing symptoms or complications, including 32 (30%) who required revision arthroscopic procedures, 7 (6%) who underwent open arthrotomy for septic arthritis management, 2 (2%) in whom avascular necrosis of the humeral head developed, 1 (1%) in whom adhesive capsulitis developed, and 1 (1%) in whom an irregular profile of the humeral epiphysis developed on plain radiographs. CONCLUSIONS: Arthroscopic management of native shoulder septic arthritis can yield alleviation of pain and a return to full range of motion, daily activities, and sports. However, there is a high reoperation rate, which may correlate with poor patient prognostic factors. This systematic review did not show the superiority of either arthroscopic surgery or open arthrotomy for the management of shoulder septic arthritis. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV, systematic review of Level IV studies.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.067
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0050.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations39
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthroscopy The Journal of Arthroscopic and Related SurgerySame topicOrthopedic Infections and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207