Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30158837›Full record

ArticleBMC clinical pathology2018

Diagnostic guidelines for the histological particle algorithm in the periprosthetic neo-synovial tissue.

G Perino, S Sunitsch, M Huber, D Ramirez, J Gallo, J Vaculova, S Natu, J P Kretzer, S Müller, P Thomas and 12 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC clinical pathology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 23 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
23citing 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

23 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Knee arthroplasty failure is associated with significant systemic multimetal exposure.Knee surgery, sports traumatology, arthroscopy : official journal of the ESSKA · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Metal-Specific Biomaterial Accumulation in Human Peri-Implant Bone and Bone Marrow.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2020
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

22 authors.

G Perino1Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY 10023 USA.ORCID 0000-0003-2588-5565
S Sunitsch2Medizinische Universität Graz, Institut für Pathologie, Graz, Austria.
M Huber3Pathologisch-bakteriologisches Institut, Otto Wagner Spital, Wien, Austria.
D Ramirez1Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Hospital for Special Surgery, 535 E 70th Street, New York, NY 10023 USA.
J GalloDepartment of Orthopaedics, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University Hospital, Palacky University Olomouc, Olomouc, Czech Republic.
J Vaculova5Department of Pathology, Fakultni Nemocnice Ostrava, Ostrava, Czech Republic.
S Natu6Department of Pathology, University hospital of North Tees and Hartlepool NHS Foundation Trust, Stockton-on-Tees, UK.
J P Kretzer7Labor für Biomechanik und Implantat-Forschung, Klinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany.
S MüllerMVZ-Zentrum für Histologie, Zytologie und Molekulare Diagnostik, Trier, Germany.
P Thomas9LMU Klinik, Klinik und Poliklinik für Dermatologie und Allergologie, Munich, Germany.
M ThomsenBaden-Baden Klinik, Baden-Baden, Germany.
M G KrukemeyerParacelsus-Kliniken Deutschland Gmbh, Osnabrück, Germany.
H ReschUniversitätsklinik für Unfallchirurgie und Sporttraumatologie, Salzburg, Austria.
T Hügle13Hôpital Orthopédique, Lausanne, Switzerland.
W Waldstein14Medizinische Universität Wien, AKH-Wien, Universitätsklinik für Orthopädie, Wien, Austria.
F Böettner15Adult Reconstruction and Joint Replacement Division, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY USA.
T GehrkeHelios Endo-Klinik, Hamburg, Germany.
S Sesselmann17Orthopädische Universitätsklinik Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany.
W Rüther18Klinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.
Z Xia19Centre for Nanohealth, Swansea University Medical School, Singleton Park, Swansea, UK.
E PurdueHospital for Special Surgery, Research Institute, New York, NY USA.
V KrennMVZ-Zentrum für Histologie, Zytologie und Molekulare Diagnostik, Trier, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe identification of implant wear particles and non-implant related particles and the characterization of the inflammatory responses in the periprosthetic neo-synovial membrane, bone, and the synovial-like interface membrane (SLIM) play an important role for the evaluation of clinical outcome, correlation with radiological and implant retrieval studies, and understanding of the biological pathways contributing to implant failures in joint arthroplasty. The purpose of this study is to present a comprehensive histological particle algorithm (HPA) as a practical guide to particle identification at routine light microscopy examination.

methodsThe cases used for particle analysis were selected retrospectively from the archives of two institutions and were representative of the implant wear and non-implant related particle spectrum. All particle categories were described according to their size, shape, colour and properties observed at light microscopy, under polarized light, and after histochemical stains when necessary. A unified range of particle size, defined as a measure of length only, is proposed for the wear particles with five classes for polyethylene (PE) particles and four classes for conventional and corrosion metallic particles and ceramic particles.

resultsAll implant wear and non-implant related particles were described and illustrated in detail by category. A particle scoring system for the periprosthetic tissue/SLIM is proposed as follows: 1) Wear particle identification at light microscopy with a two-step analysis at low (× 25, × 40, and × 100) and high magnification (× 200 and × 400); 2) Identification of the predominant wear particle type with size determination; 3) The presence of non-implant related endogenous and/or foreign particles. A guide for a comprehensive pathology report is also provided with sections for macroscopic and microscopic description, and diagnosis.

conclusionsThe HPA should be considered a standard for the histological analysis of periprosthetic neo-synovial membrane, bone, and SLIM. It provides a basic, standardized tool for the identification of implant wear and non-implant related particles at routine light microscopy examination and aims at reducing intra-observer and inter-observer variability to provide a common platform for multicentric implant retrieval/radiological/histological studies and valuable data for the risk assessment of implant performance for regional and national implant registries and government agencies.

Indexed as

ArthroplastyCeramic wear particlesHistological particle algorithmMetallic wear particlesNon-implant related particlesOrthopaedic implant wear particlesPeriprosthetic tissuePolyethylene wear particlesSynovial crystalsSynovial-like interface membrane

Identifiers

PMID30158837
PMCPMC6109269

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.