Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26542406›Full record

ArticleDer Orthopade2015

[Synovial biomarkers for differential diagnosis of painful arthroplasty].

I J Banke, N Stade, P M Prodinger, H M Mühlhofer, P Thomas, B Thomas, B Summer, M van Griensven, R von Eisenhart-Rothe, H Gollwitzer

Abstract readEnglish Abstract
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Der Orthopade, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. [Metal implant allergy update].Der Hautarzt; Zeitschrift fur Dermatologie, Venerologie, und verwandte Gebiete · 2016
    Review
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

10 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

I J BankeKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Deutschland. ingo.banke@mri.tum.de.
N StadeKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
P M ProdingerKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
H M MühlhoferKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
P ThomasKlinik und Poliklinik für Dermatologie und Allergologie der LMU München, Frauenlobstraße 9-11, 80337, München, Deutschland.
B ThomasKlinik und Poliklinik für Dermatologie und Allergologie der LMU München, Frauenlobstraße 9-11, 80337, München, Deutschland.
B SummerKlinik und Poliklinik für Dermatologie und Allergologie der LMU München, Frauenlobstraße 9-11, 80337, München, Deutschland.
M van GriensvenExperimentelle Unfallchirurgie, Klinik und Poliklinik für Unfallchirurgie, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
R von Eisenhart-RotheKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
H GollwitzerKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Deutschland.
Technical University of Munich · DEKlinikum rechts der Isar · DEKlinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie, Physikalische Medizin und Rehabilitation · DEAtos (France) · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe diagnosis and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remain true clinical challenges. PJI diminishes therapeutic success, causes dissatisfaction for the patient and medical staff, and often requires extensive surgical revision(s). At the present time, an extensive multimodal algorithmic approach is used to avoid time- and cost-consuming diagnostic aberrations. However, especially in the case of the frequent and clinically most relevant "low-grade" PJI, the current diagnostic "gold standard" has reached its limits. EVALUATION: Synovial biomarkers are thought to close this diagnostic gap, hopefully enabling the safe differentiation among aseptic, (chronic) septic, implant allergy-related and the arthrofibrotic genesis of symptomatic arthroplasty. Therefore, joint aspiration for obtaining synovial fluid is preferred over surgical synovial tissue biopsy because of the faster results, greater practicability, greater patient safety, and lower costs. In addition to the parameters synovial IL-6, CRP, and leukocyte esterase, novel biomarkers such as antimicrobial peptides and other proinflammatory cytokines are currently highlighted because of their very high to excellent diagnostic accuracy.

conclusionIndependent multicenter validation studies are required to show whether a set of different innovative synovial fluid biomarkers rather than a few single parameters is favorable for a safe "one-stop shop" differential diagnosis of PJI.

Indexed as

ArthralgiaBiomarkersCytokinesDiagnosis, DifferentialEvidence-Based MedicineHumansProsthesis-Related InfectionsSynovial FluidBiomarkersCytokinesArthritis, infectiousBiological markersDiagnosis, differentialPeriprosthetic joint infectionSynovial fluid

Identifiers

PMID26542406
OpenAlexW1938481541

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.