Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34618195›Full record

ArticleInternational orthopaedics2022

Use of PET-CT in diagnostic workup of periprosthetic infection of hip and knee joints: significance in detecting additional infectious focus.

E Roschke, T Kluge, F Stallkamp, A Roth, D Zajonz, K T Hoffmann, O Sabri, R Kluge, M Ghanem

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International orthopaedics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. [American journal of nuclear medicine and molecular imaging · 2026
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. SimultaneousInternational orthopaedics · 2022
    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

9 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

E Roschke *Klinik Und Poliklinik Für Orthopädie, Unfallchirurgie Und Plastische Chirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany. elisabeth.roschke@medizin.uni-leipzig.de.
T Kluge *Klinik Und Poliklinik Für Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
F StallkampKlinik Und Poliklinik Für Orthopädie, Unfallchirurgie Und Plastische Chirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
A RothKlinik Und Poliklinik Für Orthopädie, Unfallchirurgie Und Plastische Chirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
D ZajonzKlinik Für Orthopädie, Unfallchirurgie Und Wiederherstellungschirurgie, Zeißigwaldkliniken Bethanien Chemnitz, Chemnitz, Germany.
K T HoffmannKlinik Und Poliklinik Für Diagnostische Und Interventionelle Radiologie, Institut Für Neuroradiologie, Leipzig, Germany.
O SabriKlinik Und Poliklinik Für Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
R Kluge *Klinik Und Poliklinik Für Nuklearmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany.
M Ghanem *Klinik Und Poliklinik Für Orthopädie, Unfallchirurgie Und Plastische Chirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Leipzig, Liebigstr. 20, 04103, Leipzig, Germany.
University Hospital Leipzig · DEKlinik und Poliklinik für Nuklearmedizin · DEKlinikum Chemnitz · DEKlinik und Poliklinik für Neurologie · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe diagnosis and management of periprosthetic knee and hip infections as well as the identification and management of possible additional infectious foci is of great importance for successful therapy. This study analyses the importance of MATERIAL AND

methodsA retrospective analysis of the clinical data and findings in the period from January 2008 to December 2018 was carried out. One hundred and four patients with in-hospital treatment due to PPI of a hip or knee joint were identified and included in this study. All patients underwent a standardized clinical examination and further surgical and antibiotic therapy. The reevaluation of performed PET-CTs was specifically carried out with regard to the local PPI or detection of secondary foci.

resultsPET-CT successfully verified the PPI in 84.2% of the patients. A total of 78 possible additional foci were detected in PET-CT in 56 (53.8%) of the examined patients. Predilection sites for possible secondary foci were joints (42.3%), pulmonary (15.4%), ear-nose-throat (15.4%), spine (11.5%), and the musculocutaneous tissues (11.5%). Fifty-four positive PET-CT findings were confirmed clinically with need of additional adequate treatment.

conclusionPET-CT is a valuable diagnostic tool to confirm periprosthetic joint infection. At the same time, the whole-body PET/CT may detect additional foci of infection with impact on subsequent treatment strategy. PET was of special value in detecting infections at distant locations far from the primary infected joint in significant number. These distant infection locations can be potential cause of a re-infection. This clearly reflects the need of their diagnosis.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeProsthesis-Related InfectionsAnti-Bacterial AgentsHip JointHumansKnee JointPositron Emission Tomography Computed TomographyRetrospective StudiesAnti-Bacterial AgentsHip and knee arthroplastyPeriprosthetic infectionPET-CT

Identifiers

PMID34618195
PMCPMC8840933
OpenAlexW3203769181

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.