High performance of α-defensin lateral flow assay (Synovasure) in the diagnosis of chronic knee prosthetic infections

Bipolar vs. monopolar sealer in decreasing blood loss and transfusion rate in patients undergoing two-stage exchange in infected total knee arthroplasty: propensity score-matched study

BACKGROUND

Two-stage revision in infected total knee arthroplasty increases the risk of blood loss and the need for transfusion. The present study aimed to test the hemostatic efficacy of a bipolar sealer to reduce blood loss and transfusion requirements after the first stage in patients affected by peri-prosthetic knee infections.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients undergoing 2-stage arthroplasty for infected TKA using a bipolar sealer (Haemodiss, Kylix, Naples, IT) were compared with 24 patients of a historical control group in which conventional electrocautery was used. Transfusion data, clinical information, and operative data were evaluated. The primary outcome measure was estimated blood loss at the time of the lowest hemoglobin level (nadir). The secondary outcome measures were the transfusion requirement and the number of units transfused.

RESULTS

The total blood loss was significantly lower in the prospective bipolar sealer group than the control group (1.19 (IQR 1.03-1.93) vs. 1.75 (IQR 1.13-2.07) L; p = 0.022). The transfusion rate was 8% in the bipolar sealer group, whereas 33% in the control group (p = 0.036). Furthermore, the mean number of blood units transfused was higher in the control group (0.4 ± 0.7 vs. 0.08 ± 0.3; p < 0.01). The Baseline Hematocrit and Operative time were directly associated with blood loss, whereas the bipolar use represented inverse predictor using multiple linear regression analysis.

CONCLUSION

After the first stage of a two-stage exchange for periprosthetic knee infection, several factors influence postoperative blood loss, including preoperative HCT level and operative time. The bipolar sealer effectively supports hemostasis, thus reducing blood loss and the need for transfusions.

Synovial calprotectin in prosthetic joint infection. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Calprotectin is a protein endowed with antimicrobial properties, rendering it a distinctive marker for infection. Two methods are currently available for the assay of calprotectin: the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and the lateral flow test (LFT). We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of synovial fluid calprotectin and to compare the accuracy of the laboratory-based test and the qualitative assessment for the diagnosis of hip and knee prosthetic infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched (from inception to November 2023) MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane for studies on calprotectin in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (LR), and diagnostic odds ratio were analyzed. The receiver-operating curve for each method was calculated.

RESULTS

We included 14 articles in our meta-analysis, including 902 patients who underwent total hip and knee arthroplasties revision; 331 (37%) had a joint infection according to MSIS, MSIS-modified criteria, ICM 2018 and EBJIS 2021. Considering the false-positive result rate of 6% and false-negative result rate of 7%, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 (95% CI 0.89-0.94) and 0.93 (0.91-0.95), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.93 (95% CI 0.91-0.94). No statistical differences in terms of sensitivity and specificity were found between ELISA and LFT. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the two calprotectin assessment methods were: LFT 0.90 (95% CI 0.869-0.935) and 0.92 (95% CI 0.894-0.941), respectively; ELISA 0.96 (95% CI 0.914-0.986) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.934-0.988), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio of the ELISA was superior to that of the LFT (906.6667, 95% CI 271.2686-3030.3712 versus 113.8886, 95% CI 70.4001-184.2414; p < 0.001). The AUC for ELISA and LFT was 0.968 (95% CI 0.944-0.984) and 0.915 (95% CI 0.895-0.933), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Detection of synovial calprotectin is an accurate test for diagnosis of hip and knee prosthetic infections. The diagnostic accuracy of the two calprotectin assessment methods is almost comparable. The LFT is a valid, rapid, and more available diagnostic tool, particularly to rule out PJI.

Using nanopore sequencing to identify bacterial infection in joint replacements: a preliminary study

This project investigates if third-generation genomic sequencing can be used to identify the species of bacteria causing prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) at the time of revision surgery. Samples of prosthetic fluid were taken during revision surgery from patients with known PJIs. Samples from revision surgeries from non-infected patients acted as negative controls. Genomic sequencing was performed using the MinION device and the rapid sequencing kit from Oxford Nanopore Technologies. Bioinformatic analysis pipelines to identify bacteria included Basic Local Alignment Search Tool, Kraken2 and MinION Detection Software, and the results were compared with standard of care microbiological cultures. Furthermore, there was an attempt to predict antibiotic resistance using computational tools including ResFinder, AMRFinderPlus and Comprehensive Antibiotic Resistance Database. Bacteria identified using microbiological cultures were successfully identified using bioinformatic analysis pipelines. Nanopore sequencing and genomic classification could be completed in the time it takes to perform joint revision surgery (2-3 h). Genomic sequencing in this study was not able to predict antibiotic resistance in this time frame, this is thought to be due to a short-read length and low read depth. It can be concluded that genomic sequencing can be useful to identify bacterial species in infected joint replacements. However, further work is required to investigate if it can be used to predict antibiotic resistance within clinically relevant timeframes.

Profiling the Immune Response to Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Non-Infectious Arthroplasty Failure

Arthroplasty failure is a major complication of joint replacement surgery. It can be caused by periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) or non-infectious etiologies, and often requires surgical intervention and (in select scenarios) resection and reimplantation of implanted devices. Fast and accurate diagnosis of PJI and non-infectious arthroplasty failure (NIAF) is critical to direct medical and surgical treatment; differentiation of PJI from NIAF may, however, be unclear in some cases. Traditional culture, nucleic acid amplification tests, metagenomic, and metatranscriptomic techniques for microbial detection have had success in differentiating the two entities, although microbiologically negative apparent PJI remains a challenge. Single host biomarkers or, alternatively, more advanced immune response profiling-based approaches may be applied to differentiate PJI from NIAF, overcoming limitations of microbial-based detection methods and possibly, especially with newer approaches, augmenting them. In this review, current approaches to arthroplasty failure diagnosis are briefly overviewed, followed by a review of host-based approaches for differentiation of PJI from NIAF, including exciting futuristic combinational multi-omics methodologies that may both detect pathogens and assess biological responses, illuminating causes of arthroplasty failure.

Diagnosis and treatment of periprosthetic infection after hip replacement (a review)

Introduction. The frequency of hip arthroplasty is steadily increasing throughout the world and, although this operation has become routine, the likelihood of postoperative complications reaches 4.3 % [1]. The most dangerous of them are infectious lesions in the area of the endoprosthesis and adjacent tissues. At the same time, in addition to the threat of generalization of the infectious process, there are functional disorders in the joint area and a general deterioration in the quality of life of the patient. Timely diagnosis and treatment of the infectious process and related disorders can minimize the adverse effects of infection.

Target. The purpose of this review is to analyze modern methods for diagnosing and treating periprosthetic infection resulting from hip replacement.

Materials and methods. The subject literature was searched using the PubMed and Google Sholar databases.

Results. The main methods for diagnosing periprosthetic infection include histological and bacteriological examination of the biopsy specimen, determination of sensitivity to antibiotics, blood, and synovial fluid analysis for the content of leukocytes, IL-6, CRP, PCR diagnostics of infectious agents. Treatment consists of re-intervention and/or antibiotic therapy.

Conclusion. The most optimal method for diagnosing periprosthetic infection is a bacteriological study of biopsy specimens taken intraoperatively. The preferred method of treatment is determined by the severity of the infection, the degree of involvement of tissues adjacent to the prosthesis, the comorbid background, the nature of the infectious agent, and includes repeated revision surgery.

The Diagnostic Accuracy of Neutrophils to Lymphocytes Ratio, Platelets to Lymphocytes Ratio, Monocytes to Lymphocytes Ratio, and Platelets to Mean Platelet Volume Ratio in Diagnosing Periprosthetic Knee Infections. Are Gender-Specific Cutoff Values Needed?

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to assess the most appropriate thresholds for neutrophils to lymphocytes ratio (NLR), platelets to lymphocytes ratio, monocytes to lymphocytes ratio (MLR), and platelets to mean platelet volume ratio in patients who had a suspected prosthetic knee infection. Furthermore, we evaluated the diagnostic accuracy of our proposed thresholds by men and women.

METHODS

A total of 261 consecutive patients affected by painful total knee arthroplasty were included. International Consensus Meeting diagnostic criteria were used to identify periprosthetic infections. Sensitivity, specificity, positive, and negative predictive values were calculated for each cutoff value obtained. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was evaluated.

RESULTS

NLR reported the best diagnostic accuracy. MLR and NLR reported higher area under the curves in men and women. We obtained an MLR value ≥0.30 (optimal cutoff value for men) and ≥0.17 (optimal cutoff value for women). In men, the sensitivity and the specificity were 0.71 and 0.77, respectively, versus 0.82 and 0.29, in women. For NLR, we obtained a value ≥2.52 (best cutoff value for men) and ≥2.46 (best cutoff value for women). These cutoffs reported a sensitivity and specificity of 0.71 and 0.88 versus 0.54 and 0.76 in men and women, respectively.

CONCLUSION

These biomarkers present a low diagnostic accuracy in periprosthetic joint infection detection. Men whose MLR and NLR were above cutoff values had a 77 and 88% probability of presenting a septic prosthetic failure. NLR of at least 2.46 was reasonably sensitive for women who have a periprosthetic knee infection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic study, Level II.

Are Accuracy Studies for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Diagnosis Inherently Flawed? And What to Do with Schrödinger's Hips? A Prospective Analysis of the Alpha Defensin Lateral-Flow Test in Chronic Painful Hip Arthroplasties

Purpose

The most recent diagnostic criteria for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) include the use of the alpha-defensin (AD) lateral-flow (LF) test, but hip and knee arthroplasties were usually combined in previous studies. This prospective study was designed to examine the accuracy of the AD-LF test for diagnosis of PJI in chronic painful total hip arthroplasties (THA).

Materials and Methods

Patients with chronic painful hip arthroplasties were prospectively enrolled between March 2018 and May 2020. Exclusion criteria included acute PJI or an insufficient amount of synovial fluid. The modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria were primarily used for PJI diagnosis. Fifty-seven patients were included in the analysis group. Revision surgery was not performed in 38 patients, for different reasons (clinical group); these patients remain "Schrödinger's hips": in such cases PJI cannot be excluded nor confirmed until you "open the box".

Results

The result of the AD-LF test was positive in nine patients and negative in 48 patients. Six patients were diagnosed with PJI. AD-LF sensitivity (MSIS criteria) was 83% (95% confidence interval [CI] 36-100%) and specificity was 92% (95% CI 81-98%). The positive and negative predictive value were 56% and 98%, respectively.

Conclusion

The AD test is useful in addition to the existing arsenal of diagnostic tools, and can be helpful in the decision-making process. Not all patients with chronical painful THA will undergo revision surgery. Consequently, in order to determine the reliable diagnostic accuracy of this test, future PJI diagnostic studies should include a second arm of "Schrödinger's hips".

Reliable Diagnostic Tests and Thresholds for Preoperative Diagnosis of Non-Inflammatory Arthritis Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

Objective

The current diagnostic criteria for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) are diverse and controversial, leading to delayed diagnosis. This study aimed to evaluate and unify their diagnostic accuracy and the threshold selection of serum and synovial routine tests for PJI at an early stage.

Methods

We searched the MEDLINE and Embase databases for retrospective or prospective studies which reported preoperative‐available assays (serum, synovial, or culture tests) for the diagnosis of chronic PJI among inflammatory arthritis (IA) or non‐IA populations from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2022. Threshold effective analysis was performed on synovial polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMN%), synovial white blood cell (WBC), serum C‐reactive protein (CRP), and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) to find the relevant cut‐offs.

Results

Two hundred and sixteen studies and information from 45,316 individuals were included in the final analysis. Synovial laboratory‐based α‐defensin and calprotectin had the best comprehensive sensitivity (0.91 [0.86–0.94], 0.95 [0.88–0.98]) and specificity (0.96 [0.94‐0.97], 0.95 [0.89–0.98]) values. According to the threshold effect analysis, the recommended cut‐offs are 70% (sensitivity 0.89 [0.85–0.92], specificity 0.90 [0.87–0.93]), 4100/μL (sensitivity 0.90 [0.87–0.93], specificity 0.97 [0.93–0.98]), 13.5 mg/L (sensitivity 0.84 [0.78–0.89], specificity 0.83 [0.73–0.89]), and 30 mm/h (sensitivity 0.79 [0.74–0.83], specificity 0.78 [0.72–0.83]) for synovial PMN%, synovial WBC, serum CRP, and ESR, respectively, and tests seem to be more reliable among non‐IA patients.

Conclusions

The laboratory‐based synovial α‐defensin and synovial calprotectin are the two best independent preoperative diagnostic tests for PJI. A cut off of 70% for synovial PMN% and tighter cut‐offs for synovial WBC and serum CRP could have a better diagnostic accuracy for non‐IA patients with chronic PJI.

Diagnosing periprosthetic joint infections : a comparison of infection definitions: EBJIS 2021, ICM 2018, and IDSA 2013

AIMS

This study evaluated the definitions developed by the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) 2021, the International Consensus Meeting (ICM) 2018, and the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) 2013, for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

METHODS

In this single-centre, retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data, patients with an indicated revision surgery after a total hip or knee arthroplasty were included between 2015 and 2020. A standardized diagnostic workup was performed, identifying the components of the EBJIS, ICM, and IDSA criteria in each patient.

RESULTS

Of 206 included patients, 101 (49%) were diagnosed with PJI with the EBJIS definition. IDSA and ICM diagnosed 99 (48%) and 86 (42%) as infected, respectively. A total of 84 cases (41%) had an infection based on all three criteria. In 15 cases (n = 15/206; 7%), PJI was present when applying only the IDSA and EBJIS criteria. No infection was detected by one definition alone. Inconclusive diagnoses occurred more frequently with the ICM criteria (n = 30/206; 15%) compared to EBJIS (likely infections: n = 16/206; 8%) (p = 0.029). A better preoperative performance of the EBJIS definition was seen compared with the ICM and IDSA definitions (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The novel EBJIS definition identified all PJIs diagnosed by any other criteria. Use of the EBJIS definition significantly reduced the number of uncertain diagnoses, allowing easier clinical decision-making.Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2022;11(9):608-618.

Diagnostic Performance of Neutrophil to Lymphocyte Ratio, Monocyte to Lymphocyte Ratio, Platelet to Lymphocyte Ratio, and Platelet to Mean Platelet Volume Ratio in Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infections: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The current literature on the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection provides controversial evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of MLR, NLR, PVR, and PLR. Therefore, this critical literature search and meta-analysis was aimed to summarize the diagnostic accuracy of these biomarkers for the diagnosis of hip and knee prosthetic infection. According to the PRISMA flowchart, we searched MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, for studies on these ratios for diagnosing PJI. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and AUC were analyzed. We included 11 articles in our meta-analysis, including 7537 patients who underwent total hip and knee arthroplasties; among these, 1974 (26%) patients reported a joint infection. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.72 and 0.74, respectively, for NLR, 0.72 and 0.77 for PVR, and 0.77 and 0.75 for PLR. The sensitivity of MLR ranges from 0.54 to 0.81, while the specificity ranges from 0.78 to 0.81. Regarding the evaluation of AUCs, the best diagnostic performance was achieved by MLR (AUC = 0.77) followed by PLR (AUC = 0.75), NLR (AUC = 0.73), and PVR (AUC = 0.70). This meta-analysis demonstrates a fair diagnostic accuracy of these ratios, thus not being useful as a screening tool.

Synovial-Based Tests Outperform Serum Markers to Rule Out Infection in Total Knee Arthroplasty and Total Hip Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) provides successful results in most patients. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) accounts for up to 25% of failed TKAs needing revision. In clinical practice, consensus in diagnostic strategy for excluding or diagnosing PJI is still lacking. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to provide a simplified data-driven diagnostic strategy for aseptic knee and hip revision surgeons to rule out PJI in the outpatient clinic phase.

METHODS

A literature search in EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, and Cochrane was conducted. Studies involving the diagnosis of PJI in patients with failed TKAs and total hip arthroplasties needing revision were identified. Only studies using the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria were included. Quality was assessed using MINORS criteria. Meta-analysis was performed for each diagnostic test identified in the included studies. Pooled estimates of diagnostic accuracy measures were calculated using a bivariate model and plotted in summary receiver-operator characteristic curves. Positive and negative predictive values were calculated in a hypothetical sample of patients with a given disease prevalence.

RESULTS

Twenty-four studies met the inclusion criteria, describing a total of 2974 patients. Quality scores ranged from 13 to 19. Meta-analysis could be performed on 7 unique diagnostic tests. Highest pooled sensitivity and specificity were demonstrated for α-defensin with values of 86% and 96.6%, respectively. α-defensin and white blood cell count in synovial fluid demonstrate highest negative predictive value values.

CONCLUSIONS

We recommend, in a clinical setting with low-intermediate prevalence of PJI, performing arthrocentesis and joint fluid analysis using α-defensin and/or white blood cell count before revision TKA and revision total hip arthroplasty surgery to rule out PJI.

The alpha defensin lateral flow test is effective in predicting eradication of periprosthetic joint infection after surgical debridement

The primary aim of this study was to assess the utility of the alpha defensin lateral flow (ADLF) test for predicting the eradication of PJI after surgical debridement. The secondary aim was to describe the reliability of ADLF test in diagnosis of PJI intra- operatively. A prospective observational study was conducted in three independent orthopaedic centres. Twenty-two patients undergoing revision surgery (debridement, antibiotics and implant retention (DAIR), single or two-stage revision) for PJI were recruited, 13 female and 9 male with an average age of 64 years. Samples were collected intra-operatively at the start of the first surgical procedure and then at the completion of debridement or prior to reimplantation depending on the operation performed. These samples were tested using ADLF and then sent for microbiological analysis. The ADLF result was then compared to the corresponding culture result in order to determine the diagnostic predictive accuracy. The reliability of ADLF test to predict eradication of infection after debridement of PJI was excellent for specificity and positive predictive value (PPV) of which both where 100%, but had a poor sensitivity (14.3%) and negative predictive value (NPV) (62.5%). The reliability of ADLF test to predict PJI was poor with only a 50% sensitivity and specificity. The ADLF test has a high specificity and PPV for diagnosing eradication of infection after debridement. In contrast the ADLF testing appears to have poor diagnostic accuracy for PJI when used on intra-operative samples, prior to surgical intervention. No benefits or funds were received in suppo

Accuracy and Cost-Effectivenss of a Novel Method for Alpha Defensins Measurement in the Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infections

BACKGROUND

Two methods for detecting synovial fluids alpha defensins are available: the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and the lateral flow test. For both, the proper role and accuracy remain uncertain. The purpose of this study was to assess the accuracy of the matrix-assisted laser desorption/ionization time of flight mass spectrometry (MALDI-TOF MS) for alpha defensin detection in synovial fluids of patients with total knee arthroplasty/total hip arthroplasty failures. The hypothesis was that the alpha defensin measurement through MALDI-TOF MS assay could be a high sensitive and specific test for periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) diagnosis as compared with Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria.

METHODS

The study included 138 patients. The 2018 MSIS criteria were used to diagnose PJIs. Synovial fluids were assessed for routinely synovial fluid tests and alpha defensin measurement through MALDI-TOF MS. Sensitivity, specificity, overall diagnostic accuracy, positive and negative predictive values, receiver operator curves, and area under the curve were calculated.

RESULTS

As per the 2018 MSIS criteria, 59 PJIs (43%) and 79 aseptic failures (57%) were diagnosed. The MALDI-TOF MS assay showed an overall accuracy of 94.9%. The sensitivity was 93%, the specificity was 96%, the positive predictive value was 95%, and the negative predictive value was 95%. Receiver operator curves analysis demonstrates an area under the curve of 0.95 (P < .001).

CONCLUSION

The MALDI-TOF MS assay showed high sensitivity and specificity for alpha defensin detection in case of total knee arthroplasty/total hip arthroplasty failures. The advantages of the technology, such as the few milliliters of sample needed, the rapidity of obtaining results, and the cost-effectiveness of the procedure could make the MALDI-TOF MS alpha defensin assay a useful and widespread test in clinical practice.

Synovial Cell Count Before Reimplantation Can Predict the Outcome of Patients with Periprosthetic Knee Infections Undergoing Two-stage Exchange

BACKGROUND

Although synovial fluid can be used to diagnose periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) effectively, only the cutoff values adopted at the time of PJI diagnosis have been standardized, and few data are currently available about effectiveness of synovial fluid examination before definitive reimplantation.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

We asked: (1) What are the most appropriate thresholds for synovial fluid leukocyte counts (WBC) and neutrophil percentage (PMN percentage) in a patient group undergoing definitive reimplantation after an uninterrupted course of antibiotic therapy for chronic PJI? (2) What is the predictive value of our synovial WBC and PMN percentage threshold compared with previously proposed thresholds?

METHODS

In all, 101 patients with PJI were evaluated for inclusion from January 2016 to December 2018. Nineteen percent (19 of 101) of patients were excluded because of the presence of a chronic inflammatory disease, acute/late hematogenous infection, low amount of synovial fluid for laboratory investigations or infection persistence after spacer placement, and adequate antibiotic therapy. Finally, 81% (82 of 101) of patients with a median (range) age of 74 years (48 to 92) undergoing two-stage revision for chronic TKA infection, who were followed up at our institution for a period 96 weeks or more, were included in this study. The patients did not discontinue antibiotic treatment before reimplantation and were treated for 15 days after reimplantation if intraoperative cultures were negative. No patient remained on suppressive treatment after reimplantation. Synovial fluid was aspirated aseptically with a knee spacer in place to evaluate the cell counts before reimplantation. Thirteen percent (11 of 82) of patients had persistent or recurrent infection, defined as continually elevated erythrocyte sedimentation rate or C-reactive protein levels coupled with local signs and symptoms or positive cultures. The synovial fluid WBC counts and PMN percentage from the 11 patients with persistent or recurrent PJI were compared with the 71 patients who were believed to be free of PJI. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analyses assessed the predictive value of the parameters, and the areas under the curves (AUCs) were evaluated. The sensitivities, specificities, and positive and negative predictive values were determined for the WBC count and PMN percentage. Patients with persistent or recurrent infection had higher median WBC counts (471 cells/µL versus 1344 cells/µL; p < 0.001) and PMN percentage (36% versus 61%; p < 0.001) than did patients believed to be free of PJI.

RESULTS

ROC curve analysis identified the best threshold values to be a WBC count of 934 cells/µL or more (sensitivity 0.82 [95% CI 0.71 to 0.89], specificity 0.82 [95% CI 0.71 to 0.89]) as well as a PMN percentage of at least 52% (sensitivity 0.82 [95% CI 0.71 to 0.89] and specificity 0.78 [95% CI 0.67 to 0.86]. We found no difference between the AUCs for the WBC count and the PMN percentage (0.87 [95% CI 0.79 to 0.96] versus 0.84 [95% CI 0.73 to 0.95]. Comparing the sensitivities and specificities of the synovial fluid WBC count and PMN percentage proposed by other authors, we find that a PMN percentage more than 52% showed better predictive value than previously reported.

CONCLUSION

Based on our findings, we believe that patients with WBC counts of at least 934 and PMN percentage of 52% or more should not undergo reimplantation but rather a repeat debridement, as their risk of persistent or recurrent PJI appears prohibitively high. The accuracy of the proposed cutoffs is better than previously reported.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, diagnostic study.

Performance of alpha-defensin lateral flow test after synovial fluid centrifugation for diagnosis of periprosthetic knee infection

BACKGROUND

The quantitative alpha-defensin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) demands a prior synovial fluid centrifugation, whereas this processing is not routinely required prior to the alpha-defensin lateral flow test.

AIM

To evaluate whether a prior synovial fluid centrifugation could lead the lateral flow performance to achieve comparable results to ELISA during periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis.

METHODS

Fifty-three cases were included in this study: 22 classified as PJI and 31 classified as aseptic cases, according to Musculoskeletal Infection Society 2013 criteria. Synovial fluid samples were submitted to centrifugation, and the supernatant was evaluated by ELISA and lateral flow tests. The sensitivity (SE), specificity (SP) and accuracy of each method were calculated as well as the agreement between those two methods.

RESULTS

In all of the 31 samples from aseptic patients, alpha-defensin ELISA and lateral flow tests showed negative results for infection. Regarding the 22 infected patients, the lateral flow test was positive in 19 cases (86.4%) and the ELISA was positive in 21 (95.5%). Sensibility, SP and accuracy were, respectively, 86.4% (95%CI: 65.1%-97.1%), 100% (95%CI: 88.8%-100%) and 93.2% (95%CI: 82.8%-98.3%) for the lateral flow test and 95.5% (95%CI: 77.2%-99.9%), 100% (95%CI: 88.8%-100%) and 98.1% (95%CI: 89.9%-100%) for ELISA. An agreement of 96.2% between those methods were observed. No statistical difference was found between them (P = 0.48).

CONCLUSION

Alpha-defensin lateral flow test showed high SE, SP and accuracy after a prior synovial fluid centrifugation, achieving comparable results to ELISA. Considering the lower complexity of the lateral flow and its equivalent performance obtained in this condition, a prior centrifugation might be added as a valuable step to enhance the PJI diagnosis.

The diagnostic effect of α-defensin, D-dimer, and IL-6 in periprosthetic joint infection: A systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most common complication after artificial joint replacement as previously reported. However, the main problem at present is its difficulty in diagnosis. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of α-defensin, D-dimer, and interleukin-6 (IL-6) in clinical practice.

METHOD

Online databases were systematically searched until June 18th, 2020 with keywords and medical sub-headings terms. Studies mentioned the sensitivity and specificity of biological markers in detecting PJI were included in our study. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratios (DORs) were obtained after integration.

RESULTS

A total of 34 studies with 1036 patients diagnosing as PJI were included for comparing α-defensin, D-dimer, and IL-6. The sensitivity and specificity of α-defensin for PJI were 0.88 and 0.96, and the DOR was 189 (95% CI 72-496), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of D-dimer (0.82 and 0.72) and IL-6 (0.80 and 0.89) were lower than α-defensin.

CONCLUSION

The detection of α-defensin is a promising biomarker for diagnosing PJI. The optional cut-off needs to be curtained when using other biomarkers.

Synovial fluid α defensin has comparable accuracy to synovial fluid white blood cell count and polymorphonuclear percentage for periprosthetic joint infection diagnosis

AIMS

The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of α defensin (AD) lateral flow assay (LFA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) tests for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in comparison to conventional synovial white blood cell (WBC) count and polymorphonuclear neutrophil percentage (PMN%) analysis.

METHODS

Patients undergoing joint aspiration for evaluation of pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) were considered for inclusion. Synovial fluids from 99 patients (25 THA and 74 TKA) were analyzed by WBC count and PMN% analysis, AD LFA, and AD ELISA. WBC and PMN% cutoffs of ≥ 1,700 cells/mm³ and ≥ 65% for TKA and ≥ 3,000 cells/mm³ and ≥ 80% for THA were used, respectively. A panel of three physicians, all with expertise in orthopaedic infections and who were blinded to the results of AD tests, independently reviewed patient data to diagnose subjects as with or without PJI. Consensus PJI classification was used as the reference standard to evaluate test performances. Results were compared using McNemar's test and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis.

RESULTS

Expert consensus classified 18 arthroplasies as having failed due to PJI and 81 due to aseptic failure. Using these classifications, the calculated sensitivity and specificity of AD LFA was 83.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 58.6 to 96.4) and 93.8% (95% CI 86.2 to 98.0), respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of AD ELISA was 83.3% (95% CI 58.6 to 96.4) and 96.3% (95% CI 89.6 to 99.2), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between sensitivity (p = 1.000) or specificity (p = 0.157) of the two AD assays. AUC for AD LFA was 0.891. In comparison, AUC for synovial WBC count, PMN%, and the combination of the two values was 0.821 (sensitivity p = 1.000, specificity p < 0.001), 0.886 (sensitivity p = 0.317, specificity p = 0.011), and 0.926 (sensitivity p = 0.317, specificity p = 0.317), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic accuracy of synovial AD for PJI diagnosis is comparable and not statistically superior to that of synovial WBC count plus PMN% combined. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1119-1126.

Diagnostic Accuracy of the Synovial Fluid α-Defensin Lateral Flow Test in Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Meta-analysis

Objectives

There is a controversy on the diagnostic reliability and accuracy of synovial fluid α‐defensin in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). We performed this meta‐analysis to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the α‐defensin lateral flow test in PJI.

Methods

PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane library were systematically searched, and articles (up to January 2020) on the diagnosis of hip and knee PJIs using the α‐defensin Synovasure lateral flow test were included. The diagnostic accuracy of the α‐defensin lateral flow test in PJI was evaluated using meta‐analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive and negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio, and post‐test probabilities were calculated.

Results

Seventeen studies including 1443 cases were included. Meta‐analysis showed the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and a diagnostic odds ratio was 0.83 (95% CI 0.77, 0.88), 0.95 (95% CI 0.93, 0.97), 16.86 (95% CI 11.67, 24.37), 0.17 (95% CI 0.13, 0.24) and 85.30 (95% CI 47.76, 152.35), respectively. The area under the hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.97 (95% CI 0.95, 0.98). Subgroup analysis also confirmed the high efficiency of α‐defensin Synovasure lateral flow test in diagnosing PJIs, irrespective of ethnicity. Fagan's nomogram analysis there was a high positive post‐test probability of 94% and a low negative post‐test probability of 15%.

Conclusions

We indicated that the α‐defensin lateral flow test had a high accuracy for diagnosing PJI. Large‐scale studies are needed to validate its significance in PJI diagnosis.

Alpha-Defensin versus Leukocyte Esterase in Periprosthetic Joint Infection: An Updated Meta-Analysis

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication after arthroplasty. Prompt establishment of an infection diagnosis is critical but can be very challenging at present. In order to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of alpha-defensin or leukocyte esterase for PJI, we performed systematic research in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library to retrieve relevant studies. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two reviewers independently. A total of thirty-one eligible studies were finally included in the quantitative analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of alpha-defensin (21 studies) for the diagnosis of PJI were 0.89 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.83 to 0.93) and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.95 to 0.97), respectively. The value of the pooled diagnostic odds ratios (DOR) of alpha-defensin for PJI was 209.14 (95% CI, 97.31 to 449.50), and the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.96 to 0.99). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of leukocyte esterase (17 studies) for the diagnosis of PJI were 0.90 (95% CI, 0.84 to 0.95) and 0.96 (95% CI, 0.93 to 0.97), respectively. The value of the DOR of leukocyte esterase for PJI was 203.23 (95% CI, 96.14 to 429.61), and the AUC was 0.98 (95% CI, 0.96 to 0.99). Based on the results of our meta-analysis, we can conclude that alpha-defensin and leukocyte esterase are valuable synovial fluid markers for identifying PJI with comparable high diagnostic accuracy.

Combination Tests in the Diagnosis of Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Systematic Review and Development of a Stepwise Clinical Decision-Making Tool

BACKGROUND

Our objective was to identify combination tests used to diagnose chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) and develop a stepwise decision-making tool to facilitate diagnosis.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of existing combinations of serum, synovial, and tissue-based tests for diagnosing chronic PJI after hip or knee replacement. This work is an extension of our systematic review of single tests, from which we chose eligible studies that also described the diagnostic performance of combination tests.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven eligible articles described the performance of 56 combination tests, of which 8 combinations had at least 2 studies informing both sensitivity and specificity. We also identified 5 types of combination tests: (1) a type-I Boolean combination, which uses Boolean logic (AND, OR) and usually increases specificity at the cost of sensitivity; (2) a type-II Boolean combination, which usually increases sensitivity at the cost of specificity; (3) a triage-conditional rule, in which the value of 1 test serves to triage the use of another test; (4) an arithmetic operation on the values of 2 tests; and (5) a model-based prediction rule based on a fitted model applied to biomarker values.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians can initiate their diagnostic process with a type-II Boolean combination of serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and interleukin-6 (IL-6). False negatives of the combination can be minimized when the threshold is chosen to reach 90% to 95% sensitivity for each test. Once a joint infection is suspected on the basis of serum testing, joint aspiration should be performed. If joint aspiration yields a wet tap, a leukocyte esterase (LER) strip is highly recommended for point-of-care testing, with a reading of ++ or greater indicating PJI; a reading below ++ should be followed by one of the laboratory-based synovial tests. If joint aspiration yields a dry tap, clinicians should rely on preoperative tissue culture and histological analysis for diagnosis. Combinations based on triage-conditional, arithmetic, and model-based prediction rules require further research.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Current Clinical Methods for Detection of Peri-Prosthetic Joint Infection

Background: Currently, one of the most pressing problems in the field of orthopedic surgery is peri-prosthetic joint infection [PJI]. While there are numerous ways to detect PJI, current clinical detection methods differ across institutions and have varying criteria and protocols. Some of these methods include the Modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society system, culturing, polymerase chain reaction, the determination of the presence of certain biomarkers, testing for the presence of alpha defensin peptides, and leukocyte level testing. Methods: This review summarizes the most recent publications in the field of PJI detection to highlight current strengths as well as provide future directions to find the system for the quickest, cost-effective, and most accurate way to diagnose these types of infections. Results: The results of this literature review suggest that, while each method of diagnosis has its advantages, each has various drawbacks as well. Current methods can be expensive, take days to weeks to complete, be prone to contamination, and can produce ambiguous results. Conclusions: The findings in this review emphasize the need for a more comprehensive and accurate system for diagnosing PJI. In addition, the specific comparison of advantages and drawbacks can be useful for researchers and clinicians with goals of creating new diagnostic tests for PJIs, as well as in clinical scenarios to determine the correct treatment for patients.

Does the Alpha Defensin ELISA Test Perform Better Than the Alpha Defensin Lateral Flow Test for PJI Diagnosis? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total joint arthroplasty is a serious complication that causes severe morbidity and adds a major financial burden to the healthcare system. Although there is plenty of research on the alpha-defensin (AD) test, a meta-analysis consisting of only prospective studies investigating AD's diagnostic efficacy has not been performed. Additionally, some important subgroups such as THA and TKA have not been separately analyzed, particularly regarding two commonly used versions of the AD test, the laboratory-based (ELISA) and lateral-flow (LF).

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does the AD ELISA test perform better in the detection of PJI than the AD LF test, in terms of pooled sensitivity and specificity, when including prospective studies only? (2) Are there differences in sensitivity or specificity when using AD ELISA and AD LF tests for PJI diagnosis of THA or TKA PJI separately?

METHODS

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we included prospective studies describing the use of either AD test in the workup of pain after total joint arthroplasty (primary or revision, but not after resection arthroplasty). Fifteen studies (AD ELISA: 4; AD LF: 11) were included, with 1592 procedures. Subgroup data on THA and TKA could be retrieved for 1163 procedures (ELISA THA: 123; LF THA: 257; ELISA TKA: 228; LF TKA: 555). Studies not describing THA or TKA, those not using Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria as the standard for determining the presence or absence of PJI, those not clearly reporting data for the AD test for the total cohort, and those describing data published in another study were excluded. Studies were not excluded based on follow-up duration; the MSIS criteria could be used within a few weeks, when test results were available. Quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 criteria. Study quality was generally good. The most frequent sources of bias were related to patient selection (such as unclear inclusion and exclusion criteria) and flow and timing (uncertainty in place and time of aspiration, for example). Heterogeneity was moderate to high; a bivariate random-effects model therefore was used. To answer both research questions, sensitivity and specificity were calculated for AD ELISA and LF test groups and THA and TKA subgroups, and were compared using z-test statistics and meta-regression analysis.

RESULTS

No differences were found between the AD ELISA and the AD LF for PJI diagnosis in the pooled cohorts (THA and TKA combined), in terms of sensitivity (90% versus 86%; p = 0.43) and specificity (97% versus 96%; p = 0.39). Differences in sensitivity for PJI diagnosis were found between the THA and TKA groups for the AD ELISA test (70% versus 94%; p = 0.008); pooled AD LF test sensitivity did not differ between THA and TKA (80% versus 87%; p = 0.20). No differences in specificity were found in either subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the AD ELISA and AD LF test can be used in clinical practice because both have high sensitivity and very high specificity for PJI diagnosis. The lower sensitivity found for diagnosis of PJI in THA for the AD ELISA test must be carefully interpreted because the pooled data were heterogenous and only two studies for this group were included. Future research should analyze TKAs and THAs separately to confirm or disprove this finding.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II diagnostic study.

Alpha Defensin: A Diagnostic Accuracy Depending on the Infection Definition Used

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the alpha defensin qualitative detection (ADLF) sensitivity and specificity as compared with 3 standard classifications in the diagnostic management of chronic prosthetic joint infections.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A multicenter cohort of 136 patients with a painful arthroplasty was classified into either infected or noninfected according to the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) score, Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) score, European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) score. The sensitivity and specificity of the ADLF test were calculated for each score. Spearman's correlations between all scores were then analyzed, and multiple logistic regression was applied to identify independent variables strongly connected to the prosthetic joint infection probability.

RESULTS

The EBJIS score was positive in 68 patients, IDSA score in 50 patients, MSIS score in 41 patients, and ADLF in 40 patients. The ADLF sensitivity was 87.8% compared with MSIS, 70% compared with IDSA, and 55.8% compared with EBJIS. The ADLF specificity was in the range of 94%-97%. A good correlation was observed between synovial fluid cultures and ADLF (r = 0.73). Low to excellent correlations were recorded between ADLF and the EBJIS (r = 0.58), IDSA (r = 0.68), and MSIS (r = 0.84) scores. The synovial fluid's white blood cell count was proven to be the biological test that most influenced the probability of a positive culture (P value: .005).

DISCUSSION

The ADLF sensitivity was variable, whereas its specificity was excellent. The EBJIS score results significantly differed from those obtained via cultures, which possibly explains the ADLF low sensitivity compared with that of the EBJIS score.

Alpha-defensin lateral flow test does not appear to be useful in predicting shoulder periprosthetic joint infections

PURPOSE

Periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) remain a challenging complication after shoulder arthroplasty. The antimicrobial peptide α-defensin has been proposed as a new synovial fluid biomarker in diagnosing PJIs. To date, only little data are available on the diagnostic accuracy of α-defensin in shoulder PJIs; thus, we aimed to evaluate its diagnostic value in a cohort of patients with a suspected shoulder PJI.

METHODS

Between June 2016 and June 2018, we prospectively enrolled patients with a diagnostic shoulder aspiration due to painful shoulder arthroplasty or planned revision surgery. PJI diagnostics were performed according to the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. All patients with an antibiotic therapy within two  weeks before enrollment, insufficient amount of synovial aspirate, or bloody aspiration were excluded. α-Defensin was measured in the synovial fluid using the α-defensin lateral flow (ADLF) test (Synovasure®).

RESULTS

Out of 60 patients, we could include 29 (59% female) patients with a mean age of 70 (range, 50-92) years. A shoulder PJI was detected in five cases (Staphylococcus aureus, n = 2; Staphylococcus epidermidis, n = 2; Cutibacterium acnes, n = 1). The ADLF test was positive in seven out of 29 cases. According to the MSIS criteria, the ADLF test was false-negative in two patients and false-positive in four patients, resulting in sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of 60%, 83%, 43%, and 91%, respectively. The overall accuracy was 79%.

CONCLUSION

The ALDF test does not appear to be useful in predicting shoulder PJIs but may be used as an additional diagnostic factor in rejecting these infections.

Laboratory-based versus qualitative assessment of α-defensin in periprosthetic hip and knee infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Two methods are currently available for the assay of α-defensin: the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and the lateral flow test. We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of synovial fluid α-defensin and to compare the accuracy of the laboratory-based test and the qualitative assessment for the diagnosis of hip and knee prosthetic infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched (from inception to May 2018) MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane for studies on α-defensin in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (LR), and diagnostic odds ratio were analyzed using the bivariate diagnostic random-effects model. The receiver-operating curve for each method was calculated.

RESULTS

We included 13 articles in our meta-analysis, including 1170 patients who underwent total hip and knee arthroplasties revision; 368 (31%) had a joint infection according to MSIS and MSIS-modified criteria. Considering the false-positive result rate of 8% and false-negative result rate of 3%, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 (95% CI 0.83-0.94) and 0.95 (0.92-0.96), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.94 (0.92-0.94). No statistical differences in terms of sensitivity and specificity were found between the laboratory-based and qualitative test. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the two alpha-defensin assessment methods were: laboratory-based test 0.97 (95% CI 0.93-0.99) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.94-0.98), respectively; qualitative test 0.83 (95% CI 0.73-0.91) and 0.94 (95% CI 0.89-0.97), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio of the α-defensin laboratory based was superior to that of the qualitative test (1126.085, 95% CI 352.172-3600.702 versus 100.9, 95% CI 30.1-338.41; p < 0.001). The AUC for immunoassay and qualitative tests was 0.97 (0.95-0.99) and 0.91 (0.88-0.99), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Detection of α-defensin is an accurate test for diagnosis of hip and knee prosthetic infections. The diagnostic accuracy of the two alpha-defensin assessment methods is comparable. The lateral flow assay is a valid, rapid, and more available diagnostic tool, particularly to rule out PJI.

Risk factors, diagnosis and management of prosthetic joint infection after total hip arthroplasty

Introduction: Although a relatively rare complication, the incidence and prevalence of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is certainly rising. This is mainly due to the number of arthroplasties performed each year and our ability to capture more cases. There is currently no consensus in the optimal diagnosis and management of the infected total hip arthroplasty. Various management techniques have been described in literature.Areas covered: We discuss and summarize the literature in diagnosing prosthetic joint infection (PJI) including next-generation sequencing. An in-depth critical analysis of the biomarkers and the novel tests available in the market is reviewed including the evolving nature of the diagnostic criteria for PJI. The key issues in managing infected THA are identified.Expert commentary: The senior authors' expert opinion on diagnostic criteria is discussed. We also stress the importance of tissue/fluid analysis of microbiology and histology being key to diagnosis of PJI. The indications of one-stage versus two-stage revision arthroplasty is examined, including techniques for successful one-stage revision.

Synovial fluid α-defensin in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection: the lateral flow test is an effective intraoperative detection method

Background

Synovial fluid α-defensin is a valuable biomarker for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Its diagnostic value for PJI has been widely evaluated recently, but results are inconsistent, especially for different test methods. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of laboratory-based immunoassay and lateral flow testing for the detection of α-defensin against hip and knee PJI.

Methods

We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for articles on the diagnostic accuracy of α-defensin for PJI published up to September 2018. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated for the evaluation of the diagnostic value of α-defensin for PJI.

Results

Nineteen studies were included. Eleven evaluated laboratory-based immunoassay, and 10 evaluated the lateral flow test results. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, AUC, PLR, NLR, and DOR of laboratory-based immunoassays were 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90–0.98), 0.97 (95% CI 0.95–0.99), 0.99 (95% CI 0.98–1.00), 35.0 (95% CI 18.5–66.2), 0.04 (95% CI 0.02–0.11), and 811 (95% CI 220–2990), respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, AUC, PLR, NLR, and DOR of the lateral flow test were 0.86 (95% CI 0.81–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI 0.93–0.98), 0.95 (95% CI 0.93–0.97), 21.2 (95% CI 11.7–38.5), 0.14 (95% CI 0.10–0.21), and 148 (95% CI 64–343), respectively.

Conclusions

Laboratory-based immunoassay of α-defensin is highly accurate for the diagnosis of hip and knee PJI. The lateral flow test is less sensitive but still a useful intraoperative detection tool for PJI.

Diagnostic Accuracy of Serum, Synovial, and Tissue Testing for Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Hip and Knee Replacements: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication that can occur following total joint replacement. Patients with chronic PJI report a substantially lower quality of life and face a higher risk of short-term mortality. Establishing a diagnosis of chronic PJI is challenging because of conflicting guidelines, numerous tests, and limited evidence. Delays in diagnosing PJI are associated with poorer outcomes and morbid revision surgery. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of serum, synovial, and tissue-based tests for chronic PJI.

METHODS

This review adheres to the Cochrane Collaboration's diagnostic test accuracy methods for evidence searching and syntheses. A detailed search of MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the grey literature was performed to identify studies involving the diagnosis of chronic PJI in patients with hip or knee replacement. Eligible studies were assessed for quality and bias using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Meta-analyses were performed on tests with sufficient data points. Summary estimates and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curves were obtained using a bivariate model.

RESULTS

A total of 12,616 citations were identified, and 203 studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these 203 studies, 170 had a high risk of bias. Eighty-three unique PJI diagnostic tests were identified, and 17 underwent meta-analyses. Laboratory-based synovial alpha-defensin tests and leukocyte esterase reagent (LER) strips (2+) had the best performance, followed by white blood-cell (WBC) count, measurement of synovial C-reactive protein (CRP) level, measurement of the polymorphonuclear neutrophil percentage (PMN%), and the alpha-defensin lateral flow test kit (Youden index ranging from 0.78 to 0.94). Tissue-based tests and 3 serum tests (measurement of interleukin-6 [IL-6] level, CRP level, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR]) had a Youden index between 0.61 to 0.75 but exhibited poorer performance compared with the synovial tests mentioned above.

CONCLUSIONS

The quality of the literature pertaining to chronic PJI diagnostic tests is heterogeneous, and the studies are at a high risk for bias. We believe that greater transparency and more complete reporting in studies of diagnostic test results should be mandated by peer-reviewed journals. The available literature suggests that several synovial fluid-based tests perform well for diagnosing chronic PJI and their use is recommended in the work-up of any suspected case of chronic PJI.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Continuous Antibiotic Therapy Can Reduce Recurrence of Prosthetic Joint Infection in Patients Undergoing 2-Stage Exchange

BACKGROUND

Reimplantation microbiology and serum C-reactive protein have low diagnostic accuracy in predicting recurrence in patients with prosthetic joint infection (PJI) undergoing 2-stage exchange. We aimed at identifying factors relating to failure and comparing effect of continuous antibiotic therapy versus a holiday antibiotic period pre-reimplantation.

METHODS

This observational study included patients with PJI undergoing 2-stage exchange. Group A patients did not discontinue antibiotic treatment pre-reimplantation; in group B patients, antibiotic treatment was followed with 2 weeks of holiday antibiotic period pre-reimplantation. We defined cure as absence of recurrence for 96 weeks post-reimplantation. Statistical analyses were performed using Mann-Whitney U test, Fisher exact test, and multivariate analysis.

RESULTS

We evaluated 196 patients with PJI (median age, 66 years [interquartile range, 59-72], 91 [46%] males). Comorbidity was reported in 77 (39%), and microbiologic evidence was obtained in 164 (84%). Staphylococcus aureus was isolated in 63 of 164 (38%) patients; coagulase-negative staphylococci were isolated in 71 of 164 (43%). Favorable outcome was achieved for 169 (86%) patients (91% and 79% in groups A and B, respectively). No immunocompromise (odds ratio [OR], 2.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3-7.3; P = .04), a positive culture (OR, 3.96; 95% CI, 1.55-10.19; P = .02), and no antibiotic discontinuation (OR, 3.32; 95% CI, 1.3-8.44; P = .02) predicted favorable outcome using multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with continuous antibiotic therapy ameliorated success rate, permitting a better outcome in immunocompromised and reducing the time to reimplantation. Continuous antibiotic therapy can be considered a valid option for the treatment of patients with PJI undergoing 2-stage exchange.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic level II.

Evaluation of Lipocalin-2 as a Biomarker of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a major clinical challenge. In this study, we evaluated the diagnostic performance of lipocalin-2 (LCN2), a well-characterized neutrophil protein, in synovial fluid to discriminate PJI and aseptic implant failure.

METHODS

Synovial fluid from patients with acute or chronic PJI, aseptic failure, or controls was obtained during surgery. LCN2 was quantified using a modified enzyme immunoassay coupled with chemiluminescence (Architect Urine NGAL; Abbott Laboratories).

RESULTS

Synovial fluid was collected from 72 patients: 22 (30.6%) proven infections, 22 (30.6%) aseptic implant failures, and 28 (38.8%) controls. Synovial fluid was obtained from the hip in 18 (25%) and knee in 54 (75%) cases. Among infections, there were 16 (22.2%) acute and 6 (8.3%) chronic PJIs. The median (interquartile range) LCN2 concentration in synovial fluid was 1536.5 ng/mL (261.8-12,923) in the infection group, 87.0 (54.8-135) in the aseptic group, and 55 (45-67.8) in the control group (P < .001). LCN2 discriminated nearly perfectly between controls and confirmed infection (area under the receiver operating characteristic 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.95-1.00). The optimal cut-off value for maximal sensitivity (86.3%) and specificity (77.2%) to discriminate aseptic failure versus proven infection was 152 ng/mL, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic of 0.92 (95% confidence interval 0.84-0.99).

CONCLUSION

LCN2 is a potential novel biomarker that may be helpful to inform surgical teams on the potential risk of PJI and optimize specific surgical interventions as it distinguishes between septic and aseptic failure of prosthesis with high sensitivity and specificity.

Qualitative Alpha-defensin Versus The Main Available Tests For The Diagnosis Of Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Best Predictor Test?

Introduction: Biomarkers such as α-defensin demonstrated to be a potentially useful option in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis. Recently, a new point-of-care test for α-defensin level detection in synovial fluid has been commercialized in Europe. The aim of this study is to compare the α-defensin test (SynovasureTM) diagnostic ability with the main available clinical tests for periprosthetic joint infection diagnosis in a practical clinical setting of a Bone Infection Unit. Methods: Between 2015 and 2017, 146 patients with suspected chronic PJI were screened with SynovasureTM. Seventy-three of these met the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria and were included in the analysis. According to MSIS criteria, 40 patients (54.7%) were classified as infected and 33 (45.3%) as not infected. The results obtained with SynovasureTM were recorded and compared with standard diagnostic methods for PJI diagnosis. Results: SynovasureTM showed a sensitivity of 85.0 % (95% CI 70.2 to 94.3) and a specificity of 96.9 % (95% CI 83.8 to 99.9) for PJI detection. The positive likelihood ratio of SynovasureTM was 27.2 (95% CI 3.9 to 188.1) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.2 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.3). The diagnostic odds ratio was 181.3 (95% CI 20.7 to 1590.4). SynovasureTM demonstrated a statistical significant difference when compared to Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) and C-reactive Protein (CRP) specificity (at least one positive test) and preoperative culture sensitivity (1 positive culture). Conclusion: Our findings show that SynovasureTM sensitivity is lower than quantitative α-D test, but when compared to the main available tests shows a good specificity and the highest DOR. On the SF it is the easier test to do, due to the fact that it needs a minimal amount of SF and it is not limited by blood contamination or antibiotic use. Whereas there is no single standalone test, SynovasureTM should be considered a reliable additional test for periprosthetic joint infection diagnosis in everyday clinical practice.

Alpha-defensin and the Synovasure lateral flow device for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims

The aim of this review was to evaluate the available literature and to calculate the pooled sensitivity and specificity for the different alpha-defensin test systems that may be used to diagnose prosthetic joint infection (PJI).

Materials and Methods

Studies using alpha-defensin or Synovasure (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, Indiana) to diagnose PJI were identified from systematic searches of electronic databases. The quality of the studies was evaluated using the Quality Assessment of Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy (QUADAS) tool. Meta-analysis was completed using a bivariate model.

Results

A total of 11 eligible studies were included. The median QUADAS score was 13 (interquartile range 13 to 13) out of 14. Significant conflicts of interest were identified in five studies. The pooled sensitivity for the laboratory alpha-defensin test was 0.95 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.91 to 0.98) and the pooled specificity was 0.97 (95% CI 0.95 to 0.98) for four studies with a threshold level of 5.2 mgl-1 The pooled sensitivity for the lateral flow cassette test was 0.85 (95% CI 0.74 to 0.92) and the pooled specificity was 0.90 (95% CI 0.91 to 0.98). There was a statistically significant difference in sensitivity (p = 0.019), but not specificity (p = 0.47).

Conclusion

Laboratory-based alpha-defensin testing remains a promising tool for diagnosing PJI. The lateral flow cassette has a significantly lower performance and pooled results are comparable to the leucocyte esterase test. Further studies are required before the widespread adoption of the lateral flow cassette alpha-defensin test. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2018;100-B:703-11.