ArticleOrthopedic reviews2014
Preoperative diagnostic for periprosthetic joint infection prior to total knee revision arthroplasty.
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Reliable Diagnostic Tests and Thresholds for Preoperative Diagnosis of Non-Inflammatory Arthritis Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review.Orthopaedic surgery · 2022Pooled it
- Validation of periprosthetic joint infection after total knee arthroplasty: a cohort study on 423 cases from the Norwegian Arthroplasty Register.Acta orthopaedica · 2026Article
- Bone scan in painful knee arthroplasty: obsolete or actual examination?Acta bio-medica : Atenei Parmensis · 2017Review
- Two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty in cases of periprosthetic joint infection: an analysis of 50 cases.The open orthopaedics journal · 2015Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty remains a challenging problem. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of diagnostic knee aspiration and serum inflammatory markers in diagnostic of a PJI after total knee arthroplasty. Within 2011 and 2012, 46 patients received a one- or two-stage revision arthroplasty of the knee joint. These patients received a total number of 77 operations. A preoperative aspiration was performed in each case. We analyzed the microbiological and histological examinations of the samples from the aspiration and from the revision operation and additionally estimated serum inflammatory markers. The diagnostic aspiration had a specificity of 0.87, a sensitivity of 0.39, a positive predictive value of 0.67 and a negative predictive value of 0.68. For C-reactive protein the specificity was 0.61 and the sensitivity was 0.48, the serum white blood cell count had a specificity of 0.98 and a sensitivity of 0.23. Our data queries whether diagnostic joint aspiration or serum inflammatory markers are sufficient to verify or exclude a PJI.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.