ArticleJournal of clinical medicine2020
Increased Diagnostic Certainty of Periprosthetic Joint Infections by Combining Microbiological Results with Histopathological Samples Gained via a Minimally Invasive Punching Technique.
Article in Journal of clinical medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimized use and performance of culture for periprosthetic joint infection diagnosis: a comprehensive literature review.Clinical microbiology reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The role of biopsy in diagnosing infection after hip and knee arthroplasty: a meta-analysis.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2023Pooled it
- Accuracy and heterogeneity of histological analysis for detecting periprosthetic joint infections.Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research · 2026Article
- The Role of Single Positive Cultures in Presumed Aseptic Total Hip and Knee Revision Surgery-A Systematic Review of the Literature.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- The Challenge of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Diagnosis: From Current Methods to Emerging Biomarkers.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- [Individual megaspacers in two-stage revision of infected total hip arthroplasty-clinical and functional results after 2 years : Individual metal-endoskeleton cement spacer (iMECS)].Orthopadie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2022Article
- Periprosthetic Fungal Infections in Severe Endoprosthetic Infections of the Hip and Knee Joint-A Retrospective Analysis of a Certified Arthroplasty Centre of Excellence.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Prosthetic Joint Infection: Updates on Prevention, Diagnosis and Therapy.Journal of clinical medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe diagnosis of low-grade infections of endoprostheses is challenging. There are still no unified guidelines for standardised diagnostic approaches, recommendations are categorised into major and minor criteria. Additional histopathological samples might sustain the diagnosis. However, ambulatory preoperative biopsy collection is not widespread.
method102 patients with hip or knee endoprosthesis and suspected periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) were examined by arthrocentesis with microbiological sample and histopathological punch biopsy. The data were retrospectively analysed for diagnosis concordance.
resultsPreoperative microbiology compared to intraoperative results was positive in 51.9% (sensitivity 51.9%, specificity 97.3%). In comparison of preoperative biopsy to intraoperative diagnostic results 51.9% cases were positive (sensitivity 51.9%, specificity 100.0%). The combination of preoperative biopsy and microbiology in comparison to intraoperative results was positive in 70.4% of the cases (sensitivity 70.4%, specificity 97.3%).
conclusionThe diagnosis of PJI is complex. One single method to reliably detect an infection is currently not available. With the present method histopathological samples might be obtained quickly, easily and safely for the preoperative detection of PJI. A combination of microbiological and histopathological sampling increases the sensitivity up to 18.5% to detect periprosthetic infection.
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.