Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38667042›Full record

ArticleAntibiotics (Basel, Switzerland)2024

Evaluating the Clinical Relevance of Routine Sonication for Periprosthetic Hip or Knee Joint Infection Diagnosis.

Anas Zouitni, Jakob van Oldenrijk, P Koen Bos, Peter D Croughs, Erlangga Yusuf, Ewout S Veltman

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Effect of sonication on staphylococcal and gram-negative biofilms relevant to prosthetic joint infections: an in vitro study.Brazilian journal of microbiology : [publication of the Brazilian Society for Microbiology] · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

6 authors.

Anas ZouitniDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, dr. Molenwaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Jakob van OldenrijkDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, dr. Molenwaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-8798-0918
P Koen BosDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, dr. Molenwaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Peter D CroughsDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus Medical Center, dr. Molenwaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Erlangga YusufDepartment of Medical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases, Erasmus Medical Center, dr. Molenwaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0003-4779-2191
Ewout S VeltmanDepartment of Orthopedic Surgery and Sports Medicine, Erasmus Medical Center, dr. Molenwaterplein 40, 3015 GD Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a serious complication after joint arthroplasty. PJI screening and conventional cultures may be inconclusive. Sonication fluid culturing stands out as a valuable adjunct technique for PJI diagnosis. This study aims to determine the clinical relevance of routine sonication for all (a)septic revisions. All patients who underwent (partial) hip or knee revision arthroplasty between 2012 and 2021 were retrospectively reviewed. We formed three groups based on the European Bone and Joint Society PJI criteria: infection confirmed, likely, and unlikely. We analyzed clinical, laboratory, and radiological screening. Sensitivity and specificity were calculated for synovial fluid (preoperative), tissue, and sonication fluid cultures. We determined the clinical relevance of sonication as the percentage of patients for whom sonication confirmed PJI; 429 patients who underwent (partial) revision of hip or knee arthroplasty were included. Sensitivity and specificity were 69% and 99% for synovial fluid cultures, 76% and 92% for tissue cultures, and 80% and 89% for sonication fluid cultures, respectively. Sonication fluid cultures improved tissue culture sensitivity and specificity to 83% and 99%, respectively. In 11% of PJIs, sonication fluid cultures were decisive for diagnosis. This is applicable to acute and chronic infections. Sonication fluid cultures enhanced the sensitivity and specificity of PJI diagnostics. In 11% of PJI cases, causative pathogens were confirmed by sonication fluid culture results. Sonication fluid culture should be performed in all revision arthroplasties.

Indexed as

diagnosisEuropean Bone and Joint Societyhip arthroplastyimplant-related infections (IRI)knee arthroplastymicrobiologyperiprosthetic joint infection (PJI)revision arthroplastyroutine sonicationsonication fluid

Identifiers

PMID38667042
PMCPMC11047521

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.