Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40082905›Full record

ArticleJournal of orthopaedic surgery and research2025

The diagnostic accuracy of blood C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate in periprosthetic joint infections - A 10-year analysis of 1510 revision hip and knee arthroplasties from a single orthopaedic center.

Dariusz Grzelecki, Maciej Kocon, Rafał Mazur, Aleksandra Grajek, Jacek Kowalczewski

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of orthopaedic surgery and research, 2025. 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. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  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

5 authors.

Dariusz GrzeleckiDepartment of Orthopedics and Rheumoorthopedics, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Professor Adam Gruca Orthopedic and Trauma Teaching Hospital, Konarskiego 13, Otwock, 05- 400, Poland. dariuszgrzelecki@gmail.com.
Maciej KoconDepartment of Orthopedics and Rheumoorthopedics, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Professor Adam Gruca Orthopedic and Trauma Teaching Hospital, Konarskiego 13, Otwock, 05- 400, Poland.
Rafał MazurDepartment of Orthopedics and Rheumoorthopedics, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Professor Adam Gruca Orthopedic and Trauma Teaching Hospital, Konarskiego 13, Otwock, 05- 400, Poland.
Aleksandra GrajekCentral Laboratory of Professor Adam Gruca Orthopedic and Trauma Teaching Hospital, Konarskiego 13, Otwock, 05-400, Poland.
Jacek KowalczewskiDepartment of Orthopedics and Rheumoorthopedics, Centre of Postgraduate Medical Education, Professor Adam Gruca Orthopedic and Trauma Teaching Hospital, Konarskiego 13, Otwock, 05- 400, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundDespite the availability of many highly accurate biomarkers and novel criteria, serum C-reactive protein (CRP) and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) are still the basis for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study aims to analyze the influence of different demographical and clinical factors on the cut-off values and accuracy of CRP and ESR in diagnosing chronic PJI.

methodsA total number of 4757 patients (with ICD-10 codes T84.0 and T84.5) operated on between January 2014 to December 2023 in a single orthopaedic center were screened in terms of the inclusion and exclusion criteria. Finally, 1510 patients (1032 aseptic revisions and 478 periprosthetic joint infections [PJI]) were included in the analysis. The best cut-off values, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) for both CRP and ESR for all cohort and for subgroups divided depending on the demographical (gender, joint and BMI) and clinical factors (prosthesis fixation, specific diagnostic criteria, and virulence of the bacteria) were calculated.

resultsFor all cohort, the best cut-off value for CRP was 9.6 mg/L with an area under the curve (AUC) of 0.93 and for ESR was 29 mm/h with the AUC of 0.891. For CRP the sensitivity was higher (84.9%) than for ESR (75.1%), with the same values of specificity (90.5% and 90.8%, respectively). According to the specific subgroups, for CRP higher sensitivity was observed for males (89.6%) than for females (82.6%) if lower thresholds were used. Similarly, when the higher cut-off value for CRP was applied, better specificity for high-virulent (94.8%) than for low-virulent pathogens (88.9%) was observed. For ESR, superior sensitivity values were observed if a fistula was observed, for lower BMI thresholds and for infections caused by high-virulent pathogens. Higher optimal threshold and better specificity were observed for knees than for hips, without the appearance of fistula, when minor criteria were used and infection was caused by high-virulent pathogens.

conclusionsOur study indicates better sensitivity for CRP than ESR and similar specificity values for diagnosing chronic PJI. If results oscillate close to 10 mg/L for CRP and between 25 and 30 mm/h for ESR we propose to use different cut-off values depending on the demographic and/or clinical factors to increase diagnostic accuracy.

Indexed as

Arthroplasty, Replacement, HipArthroplasty, Replacement, KneeBlood SedimentationC-Reactive ProteinProsthesis-Related InfectionsAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkersFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedPredictive Value of TestsReoperationRetrospective StudiesSensitivity and SpecificityBiomarkersC-Reactive ProteinC-reactive proteinErythrocyte sedimentation ratePeriprosthetic joint infectionRevision hip arthroplastyRevision knee arthroplasty

Identifiers

PMID40082905
PMCPMC11907961

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.