ArticleOrthopedic reviews2022
Management of periprosthetic knee joint infections: focus on the role of Nuclear Medicine (v2).
Article in Orthopedic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: When faced with a painful knee replacement, ruling out infection is mandatory to set the correct therapeutic approach. However, it is not always easy, especially in subclinical/chronic infections. A multidisciplinary approach is necessary to assess in the most correct way each case of suspected periprosthetic knee joint infection. This review explores the role of nuclear medicine investigations in the management of periprosthetic knee infections and their proper use within a multidisciplinary pathway. Methods: A PubMed search was conducted selecting studies from the past 10 years. Results: Triphasic bone scintigraphy has high sensitivity (93%) but poor specificity (56%) for periprosthetic joint infections of the knee, with a high negative predictive value (NPV), ranging from 96% to 100%. Consequently, a negative bone scan is useful in ruling out infection. In contrast, radiolabeled leukocyte scintigraphy is characterized by a sensitivity of 85.7-93%, specificity of 93.6-100%, diagnostic accuracy of 92.6-98%, NPV of 93-97.8%, and positive predictive value (PPV) of 66.7-100%. By adding a tomographic acquisition with hybrid single-photon emission computed tomography combined with computed tomography technique (SPECT/CT), the diagnostic accuracy increases. Because 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) accumulates at both sites of inflammation and infection, FDG positron emission tomography (PET/CT) shows low specificity. Conclusions: A common decision-making process in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection is not yet validated and multidisciplinary integration is mandatory. In this context, nuclear medicine can contribute decisively.
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.