ArticleBone & joint open2025
Performance of established test methods in diagnosing persistent infection at the second stage of a two-stage procedure for periprosthetic hip and knee infections.
Article in Bone & joint open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Aims: This study aims to evaluate the diagnostic performance of serum parameters, synovial fluid analysis, tissue and sonication fluid cultures, and histology to identify persistent infection, and to predict reinfection at reimplantation of two-stage exchange arthroplasty. Methods: From January 2015 to January 2023, a total of 133 patients with completed two-stage exchange arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total hip or knee arthroplasty were eligible for inclusion in this retrospective study. Diagnostic values of serum parameters (CRP, white blood cell count (WBC), differential, fibrinogen), synovial fluid WBC (SF-WBC), culture (synovial fluid, tissue, sonication fluid), and histology were evaluated prior to or at the second stage. Additionally, Kaplan-Meier curves were used to determine infection-free prosthesis survival rates for all parameters. Results: Serum CRP showed the highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC; 0.624) among all analyzed test methods (serum WBC: 0.501; serum % polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMN): 0.605; fibrinogen: 0.533; SF-WBC: 0.601; SF culture: 0.566; tissue culture: 0.463; sonication fluid culture: 0.473; histology: 0.492). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV) of CRP were 51.7% (95% CI 35 to 69), 73.1% (95% CI 64 to 81), 34.9% (95% CI 21 to 49), and 84.4% (95% CI 77 to 92), respectively. In 35% (n = 15/43) of patients with an elevated serum CRP (≥ 10 mg/l), reinfection occurred, while the reinfection rate was only 16% (n = 14/90) in patients with a normal CRP (< 10 mg/l, p = 0.012). Reinfection rates in patients with all-negative cultures at 23% were not significantly different from cases with positive cultures at 13% (p = 0.352). Conclusion: Although CRP showed the best diagnostic value among all analyzed test methods, none of them could reliably identify persistent infection or predict reinfection. Additionally, a positive culture may not justify a further intervention (spacer exchange, prolonged antibiotics). In case of positive culture or elevated CRP, a further thorough debridement at the second stage is recommended to increase the chance of infection eradication.
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.