A retrospective comparative study of infection control rate and clinical outcome between open debridement using antibiotic-impregnated cement beads and a two-stage revision in acute periprosthetic knee joint infection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this study was to determine whether the infection control rate of a modified debridement, antibiotics, and implant retention (DAIR) protocol (DAIR with antibiotic-impregnated cement beads) is comparable to that of 2-stage revision for acute periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We also aimed to determine whether this modified DAIR technique produced better clinical results than those obtained using 2-stage revision in terms of functional outcome, range of motion (ROM), and patient satisfaction at 2 years after surgery.This retrospective comparative study included patients who underwent modified DAIR (7 patients, 9 knees) or 2-stage revision (8 patients, 9 knees) for acute PJI of the knee joint. Infection control rate, functional outcome measured using Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Arthritis Index (WOMAC) score, ROM and patient satisfaction were compared between the two groups.There was no difference in infection control rates between the modified DAIR and 2-stage revision groups (78% vs 78%, respectively). In contrast, surgical outcome in the modified DAIR group was tended to be better than 2-stage revision group, but it did not reach statistical significance. Median maximal range of flexion was 103° in the modified DAIR group and it was 90° in the 2-stage group (P = .191). In addition, the median WOMAC function score was 24 in the modified DAIR group and it was 30 in the 2-stage group (P = .076). Median patient satisfaction measured using visual analogue scale was 8 in the modified DAIR group and 5 in the 2-stage group (P = .069).The infection control rates of the modified DAIR protocol and 2-stage revision protocol were similar for the treatment of acute PJI of the knee joint. However, the modified DAIR protocol could not provide substantially increased functional outcomes and patient satisfaction compared to 2-stage revision. Therefore, the modified DAIR technique should be considered to be of limited use in patients with high surgical morbidity.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".