Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37525262›Full record

ReviewArthroplasty (London, England)2023

Current relevance of biomarkers in diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection: an update.

Saksham Tripathi, Saad Tarabichi, Javad Parvizi, Ashok Rajgopal

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Arthroplasty (London, England), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. A review of periostin in orthopedics.Osteoarthritis and cartilage open · 2025
    Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Predictors of outcome following two-stage revision total knee arthroplasty.Archives of orthopaedic and trauma surgery · 2024
    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

4 authors.

Saksham TripathiInstitute of Musculoskeletal Disorders and Orthopaedics, Medanta-The Medicity, Gurugram, HR, 122001, India. tripathy_saksham@yahoo.co.in.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9713-4141
Saad TarabichiRothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA.
Javad ParviziRothman Orthopaedic Institute at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, PA, 19107, USA.
Ashok RajgopalInstitute of Musculoskeletal Disorders and Orthopaedics, Medanta-The Medicity, Gurugram, HR, 122001, India.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

With a significant rise in the number of arthroplasty procedures performed worldwide, the increasing revision burden posed by periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a matter of growing concern. In spite of various attempts to diagnose PJI, there are no defined tests that can be called a gold standard. Given the importance of early diagnosis in PJI, newer tests and biomarkers have been introduced to improve cumulative diagnostic accuracy. Novel biomarkers like calprotectin, lipocalcin, monocyte-to-lymphocyte ratio, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-to-lymphocyte ratio and platelet-to-mean platelet volume ratio have demonstrated a potential as diagnostic biomarkers for PJI. This article discusses the relevance of available and newly described diagnostic biomarkers to provide a perspective on the practical applicability in current medical practice, as well as highlights some recent advances in biomarkers for the diagnosis of PJI.

Indexed as

BiomarkersDiagnosisPeriprosthetic joint infectionSerumSynovial

Identifiers

PMID37525262
PMCPMC10391917

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.