Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28714050›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie2018

Superiority of the sonication method against conventional periprosthetic tissue cultures for diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections.

Sofia Tani, Panagiotis Lepetsos, Antonios Stylianakis, John Vlamis, Konstantinos Birbas, Ioannis Kaklamanos

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of orthopaedic surgery & traumatology : orthopedie traumatologie, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 28 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
28citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
4.7field-weighted citation impact, top 5% 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

28 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. 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

6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Sofia TaniMicrobiological Laboratory, KAT Hospital, Nikis 2, Kifissia, 14561, Athens, Greece.
Panagiotis Lepetsos4th Department of Trauma and Orthopaedics, KAT Hospital, Nikis 2, Kifissia, 14561, Athens, Greece. plepetsos@med.uoa.gr.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-7489-7242
Antonios StylianakisMicrobiological Laboratory, KAT Hospital, Nikis 2, Kifissia, 14561, Athens, Greece.
John Vlamis3rd Academic Department of Orthopaedics and Trauma, University of Athens Medical School, KAT Hospital, Nikis 2, Kifissia, 14561, Athens, Greece.
Konstantinos Birbas"Agioi Anargyroi" General and Oncologic Hospital of Kifissia, Timiou Stavrou, Kifissia, 14565, Athens, Greece.
Ioannis Kaklamanos"Agioi Anargyroi" General and Oncologic Hospital of Kifissia, Timiou Stavrou, Kifissia, 14565, Athens, Greece.
KAT General Hospital of Attica · GRHospital Agioi Anargyroi · GRNational and Kapodistrian University of Athens · GR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionDiagnosis of periprosthetic infections is challenging. The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of conventional periprosthetic tissue culture and culture of sonication fluid of the explanted prostheses.

methodsWe prospectively enrolled 114 patients undergoing revision hip or knee arthroplasty because of loosening of the prostheses, at our institution, between July 2012 and July 2016. Patients' medical history and demographic characteristics were recorded. The explanted hardware was separated in sterile containers and sonicated under sterile conditions. At least five samples of periprosthetic tissue were sent for culture and histological examination. We compared the culture of samples obtained by sonication of explanted hip and knee prostheses with conventional culture of periprosthetic tissue for the microbiological diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection.

resultsInfectious Diseases Society of America guidelines were used for the definition of prosthetic joint infection. Sixty-one patients had periprosthetic infection and 53 aseptic loosening (73 hip prostheses and 41 knee prostheses). The sensitivity of sonication fluid culture was 77.04%, and the sensitivity of conventional tissue cultures was 55.73% (p value = 0.012). The specificities of the two methods were 98.11 and 94.34%, respectively. The sensitivity of the histopathological examination of the periprosthetic tissue was 72.10%. There were 17 patients with PJI where the isolated pathogen was detected in SFC but not in PTC, while in five cases the pathogen was detected only in PTC. There were nine patients where no bacteria were detected by any microbiological method and the diagnosis was based on clinical and histological findings, according to the guidelines.

conclusionsThe sonication method represents a reliable test for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections with a greater sensitivity and specificity than the conventional periprosthetic tissue cultures.

Indexed as

Prosthesis FailureSonicationTissue Culture TechniquesAgedAged, 80 and overArthroplasty, Replacement, HipArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeColony Count, MicrobialDevice RemovalFemaleGram-Negative Bacterial InfectionsHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsProspective StudiesBiofilmPeriprosthetic infectionsSonicationTotal joint arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID28714050
OpenAlexW2734730916

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.