↓ Skip to main content

Suture-related pseudoinfection after total hip arthroplasty

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, June 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 Mendeley
Title
Suture-related pseudoinfection after total hip arthroplasty
Published in
Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology, June 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10195-014-0300-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Luca Pierannunzii, Andrea Fossali, Orazio De Lucia, Arturo Guarino

Abstract

Absorbable sutures are widely used for wound closure after total hip replacement. Here we present two cases of suture-related foreign-body reaction that perfectly mimicked a periprosthetic joint infection, with sterile abscess formation and physical and laboratory signs of inflammation acutely presenting 7-8 weeks after surgery, at the time of suture absorption. Both recurred with analogous timing after irrigation and debridement, likely due to re-using the same suture material. Multiple negative microbiological samples and positive histological samples showing a foreign-body reaction are the fundamental steps towards the diagnosis of a suture-related pseudoinfection (SRPI). Only three other cases have been reported to date, but the recurrence, together with the self-healing course after relapse, represents a completely novel feature and possibly the strongest demonstration of the supposed aetiopathogenesis. The knowledge of this possible complication leads to some clinical implications: all potential periprosthetic joint infections should routinely undergo not only microbiological but also histological sampling; caution should be used when recommending prosthesis exchange for potential infections occurring in the time range of suture absorption; lastly, if SRPI is suspected, a suture with low propensity to induce foreign-body reactions should be chosen after irrigation and debridement and the volume of absorbable material left in the wound should be as small as possible.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 3%
Unknown 30 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 13%
Researcher 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 10%
Other 1 3%
Student > Bachelor 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 18 58%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 29%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 3%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 3%
Psychology 1 3%
Unknown 19 61%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 December 2021.
All research outputs
#14,081,606
of 23,849,058 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
#103
of 222 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#114,054
of 230,805 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Orthopaedics and Traumatology
#3
of 5 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,849,058 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 39th percentile – i.e., 39% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 222 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 230,805 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 2 of them.