1
|
Li S, Mu R, Guo X. Defensins regulate cell cycle: Insights of defensins on cellular proliferation and division. Life Sci 2024; 349:122740. [PMID: 38777302 DOI: 10.1016/j.lfs.2024.122740] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/20/2024] [Revised: 05/12/2024] [Accepted: 05/18/2024] [Indexed: 05/25/2024]
Abstract
Defensins are a class of small antimicrobial peptides that play a crucial role against pathogens. However, recent research has highlighted defensins exhibit the ability to influence cell cycle checkpoints, promoting or inhibiting specific phases such as G1 arrest or S/M transition. By regulating the cell cycle, defensins impact the proliferation of normal and cancerous cells, with implications for cancer development and progression. Dysregulation of defensin expression can disrupt the delicate balance of cell cycle regulation, leading to uncontrolled cell growth and an increased risk of tumor formation. Defensins contribute to the resolution of inflammation, stimulate angiogenesis, and enhance the migration and proliferation of cells involved in tissue repair. Furthermore, The ability of defensins to respond to microenvironmental changes further demonstrates the significance of these peptides in host defense mechanisms and immune function. By adjusting their expression, defensins continue to combat pathogens effectively and maintain homeostasis within the body. This review highlights the multifaceted role of defensins in regulating the cell cycle and their broader implications in cancer progression, tissue repair, and microenvironmental response.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Shuang Li
- Institute of Wound Prevention and Treatment, Shanghai University of Medicine & Health Sciences, Shanghai, 201318, China.
| | - Rongrong Mu
- Affiliated Hospital of Sichuan Nursing Vocational College, The Third People's Hospital of Sichuan Province, China
| | - Xueqin Guo
- Department of Pathology, Gaomi City People's Hospital, Gaomi 261500, China
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Denyer S, Eikani C, Sheth M, Schmitt D, Brown N. Diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Jt Open 2023; 4:881-888. [PMID: 37984446 PMCID: PMC10659814 DOI: 10.1302/2633-1462.411.bjo-2023-0094.r1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/22/2023] Open
Abstract
Aims The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be challenging as the symptoms are similar to other conditions, and the markers used for diagnosis have limited sensitivity and specificity. Recent research has suggested using blood cell ratios, such as platelet-to-volume ratio (PVR) and platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio (PLR), to improve diagnostic accuracy. The aim of the study was to further validate the effectiveness of PVR and PLR in diagnosing PJI. Methods A retrospective review was conducted to assess the accuracy of different marker combinations for diagnosing chronic PJI. A total of 573 patients were included in the study, of which 124 knees and 122 hips had a diagnosis of chronic PJI. Complete blood count and synovial fluid analysis were collected. Recently published blood cell ratio cut-off points were applied to receiver operating characteristic curves for all markers and combinations. The area under the curve (AUC), sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were calculated. Results The results of the analysis showed that the combination of ESR, CRP, synovial white blood cell count (Syn. WBC), and polymorphonuclear neutrophil percentage (PMN%) with PVR had the highest AUC of 0.99 for knees, with sensitivity of 97.73% and specificity of 100%. Similarly, for hips, this combination had an AUC of 0.98, sensitivity of 96.15%, and specificity of 100.00%. Conclusion This study supports the use of PVR calculated from readily available complete blood counts, combined with established markers, to improve the accuracy in diagnosing chronic PJI in both total hip and knee arthroplasties.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven Denyer
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, USA
| | - Carlo Eikani
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, USA
| | - Monica Sheth
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, USA
| | - Daniel Schmitt
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, USA
| | - Nicholas Brown
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery and Rehabilitation, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, Illinois, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Nelson SB, Pinkney JA, Chen AF, Tande AJ. Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Current Clinical Challenges. Clin Infect Dis 2023; 77:e34-e45. [PMID: 37434369 PMCID: PMC11004930 DOI: 10.1093/cid/ciad360] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/07/2023] [Indexed: 07/13/2023] Open
Abstract
Over the last several decades, periprosthetic joint infection has been increasing in incidence and is occurring in more complex patients. While there have been advances in both surgical and medical treatment strategies, there remain important gaps in our understanding. Here, we share our current approaches to the diagnosis and management of periprosthetic joint infection, focusing on frequent clinical challenges and collaborative interdisciplinary care.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sandra B Nelson
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Jodian A Pinkney
- Division of Infectious Diseases, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Antonia F Chen
- Department of Orthopedic Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
| | - Aaron J Tande
- Division of Public Health, Infectious Diseases, and Occupational Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Fisher CR, Patel R. Profiling the Immune Response to Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Non-Infectious Arthroplasty Failure. Antibiotics (Basel) 2023; 12:296. [PMID: 36830206 PMCID: PMC9951934 DOI: 10.3390/antibiotics12020296] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/30/2022] [Revised: 01/20/2023] [Accepted: 01/29/2023] [Indexed: 02/04/2023] Open
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Cody R. Fisher
- Mayo Clinic Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences, Department of Immunology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
- Division of Clinical Microbiology, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| | - Robin Patel
- Division of Clinical Microbiology, Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
- Division of Public Health, Infectious Diseases, and Occupational Medicine, Department of Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN 55905, USA
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Soliman SB, Davis JJ, Muh SJ, Vohra ST, Patel A, van Holsbeeck MT. Ultrasound evaluations and guided procedures of the painful joint arthroplasty. Skeletal Radiol 2022; 51:2105-2120. [PMID: 35624311 DOI: 10.1007/s00256-022-04080-y] [Citation(s) in RCA: 6] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/19/2022] [Revised: 05/22/2022] [Accepted: 05/22/2022] [Indexed: 02/02/2023]
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to describe the use of ultrasound for the diagnosis and treatment of painful joint arthroplasty. Ultrasound plays a crucial role in the diagnosis of the painful joint arthroplasty, especially given its unique dynamic capabilities, convenience, and high resolution. Ultrasound guidance is also instrumental for procedures in both diagnosing and in select cases, treating the painful joint arthroplasty. Topics to be discussed in this article include trends in arthroplasty placement, benefits of the use of ultrasound overall, and ultrasound evaluation of periprosthetic joint infections. We will also review the sonographic findings with dissociated/displaced components and adverse reaction to metallic debris including metallosis, trunnionosis, and metal-on-metal pseudotumors. Additionally, we will discuss ultrasound evaluation of tendon pathologies with arthroplasties, including dynamic maneuvers to evaluate for tendon impingement/snapping. Finally, we will cover ultrasound-guided joint arthroplasty injection indications and precautions. KEY POINTS: • Ultrasound is preferred over MRI in patients with joint arthroplasty and plays a crucial role in diagnosis, especially given its unique dynamic capabilities, convenience and high resolution. • It is especially beneficial for US-guided aspiration in periprosthetic joint infections; effectively used to evaluate periprosthetic fluid collections, facilitating differentiation between abscesses and aseptic collections, and tracking sinus tracts. • Recently, the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infections has shifted focus to biomarkers in the periprosthetic fluid, specifically α-defensin, which has a high sensitivity and specificity for diagnosing infection. • Cutibacterium acnes is a major pathogen responsible for shoulder arthroplasty infections, often presenting with normal laboratory values and since slow growing, must be kept for a minimum of 14 days.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Steven B Soliman
- Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology, Department of Radiology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
| | - Jason J Davis
- Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Department of Orthopedics, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Stephanie J Muh
- Division of Orthopedic Surgery, Department of Orthopedics, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Saifuddin T Vohra
- Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology, Department of Radiology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA
| | - Ashish Patel
- Division of Musculoskeletal Imaging, Department of Radiology, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Marnix T van Holsbeeck
- Division of Musculoskeletal Radiology, Department of Radiology, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Improve Integration of In Vitro Biofilm Body of Knowledge to Support Clinical Breakthroughs in Surgical Site Infection. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF ORTHOPAEDIC SURGEONS GLOBAL RESEARCH AND REVIEWS 2021; 5:01979360-202111000-00002. [PMID: 34748523 PMCID: PMC8575432 DOI: 10.5435/jaaosglobal-d-20-00217] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/21/2020] [Accepted: 09/17/2021] [Indexed: 01/28/2023]
Abstract
Prosthetics increase the risk of deep surgical site infections in procedures intended to restore function. In orthopaedics, prosthetic joint infections can lead to repetitive surgeries, amputation, or worse. Biofilm formation both in vitro and in vivo involves stages of attachment, accumulation, and maturation. The level of maturation affects susceptibility to antibiotics, the immune system, and the success of surgical interventions. A review of the literature indicates that orthopedic publications are less likely to mention biofilm. We have reviewed animal models of infection to assess in vivo models of prosthetic infection. Although most prosthetic infections seem to originate from local skin microbiota, clinically representative biofilm inocula are unusual. Biofilm-related end points are more widely adopted, but studies rarely include both quantification of adherent microbial burden and imaging of the in vivo biofilm. Failure to differentiate between planktonic and biofilm infections can skew research away from needed chronic disease models. In this review, we address prosthetic joint infections as an important model for chronic biofilm infection research, identify critical requirements for in vivo models of chronic infection, and propose that resistance to the terminology of biofilm research exists within both research and regulation, which could limit progress toward important orthopaedic targets.
Collapse
|