Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19690832›Full record

ArticleDer Orthopade2009

[Histopathological diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection following total hip arthroplasty : use of a standardized classification system of the periprosthetic interface membrane].

M Müller, L Morawietz, O Hasart, P Strube, C Perka, S Tohtz

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Orthopade, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Graphic type differentiation of cell count data for diagnosis of early and late periprosthetic joint infection: A new method.Technology and health care : official journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

M MüllerCentrum für Muskuloskeletale Chirurgie, Klinik für Orthopädie, Klinik für Unfall- und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Chariteplatz 1, 10117, Berlin, Deutschland. michael.mueller@charite.de
L Morawietz
O Hasart
P Strube
C Perka
S Tohtz

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe distinction between aseptic and septic loosening of a total hip arthroplasty is a diagnostic challenge. Therapy and clinical success depend on the correct diagnosis. Histopathological evaluation of the periprosthetic interface membrane is one possible diagnostic parameter; detailed analysis of tissue characteristics may reflect the cause of failure. This study evaluated the diagnostic value of a published histopathological consensus classification for the periprosthetic interface membrane in the identification of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

methodsBetween 2004 and 2008, a prospective analysis was performed in 106 patients who had revisions because of assumed PJI. Based on clinical presentation, radiography, and haematological screening, infection was assumed, and a joint aspiration was performed. Based on these findings, a two-stage revision was performed, with intraoperative samples for culture and histological evaluation obtained. Final diagnosis of infection was based on the interpretation of the clinical presentation and the preoperative and intraoperative findings. The basis for histopathological evaluation was the consensus classification for the periprosthetic interface membrane. Sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy were calculated for each parameter.

resultsIn 92 patients, a positive diagnosis of PJI could be made. Histopathology yielded the highest accuracy (0.93) in identification of PJI, identifying 86 of 92 infections (69 type II, 17 type III). In 13 of the 14 noninfected hips, histopathology correlated in 13 (93%) cases (10 type I, three type IV). The accuracies of microbiological culture, C-reactive protein, and aspiration were 0.82, 0.86, and 0.54, respectively.

conclusionIn the diagnosis of PJI, histopathological evaluation of the periprosthetic interface membrane proved very effective. To analyse the cause of prosthesis loosening, tissue samples of the periprosthetic interface membrane should be evaluated on the basis of the consensus classification in all revision surgeries.

Indexed as

Prosthesis FailureAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiopsyGermanyHumansMiddle AgedProsthesis-Related InfectionsReference StandardsReproducibility of ResultsSensitivity and Specificity

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.