ArticleBone & joint research2026
Is three-phase bone scintigraphy really obsolete? : a combined TPBS-CRP diagnostic method.
Article in Bone & joint research, 2026. 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: Three-phase bone scintigraphy (TPBS) is a simple, reliable, and straightforward imaging modality for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). This study aimed to evaluate the diagnostic efficacy of the combined diagnostic method of TPBS and CRP in the detection of PJI. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 317 patients undergoing revision surgery (211 hips and 106 knees) between January 2017 and January 2024, with TPBS obtained prior to surgical intervention. PJI was diagnosed according to the 2013 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. The diagnostic performance of TPBS, CRP, and TPBS-CRP combined method was evaluated. Results: In the total knee arthroplasty (TKA) cohort, TPBS-CRP achieved maximal sensitivity (100%) and negative predictive value (100%), enabling definitive exclusion of PJI, albeit with reduced specificity (50.0%). Antibiotic therapy significantly reduced CRP accuracy (79.1% vs 97.1%, p = 0.020) but minimally impacted TPBS (100% vs 88.6%, p = 0.037). For total hip arthroplasty (THA), the TPBS-CRP demonstrated a superior diagnostic efficacy (AUC = 0.846, 0.834, and 0.795) and demonstrated a more balanced sensitivity (81.6%, 67.3%, and 64.3%) and specificity (87.6%, 91.2%, and 94.7%) compared to CRP and TPBS. Antibiotic-treated patients exhibited significantly higher diagnostic accuracy for TPBS (81.5% vs 57.7%, p = 0.028), CRP (88.9% vs 59.2%, p = 0.005), and TPBS-CRP (96.3% vs 76.1%, p = 0.020) compared to untreated patients. False-positive TPBS cases in both cohorts exhibited severe bone loss and prolonged symptoms compared to true negatives (p < 0.05). Conclusion: TPBS demonstrates limited specificity in differentiating PJI from aseptic loosening. The TPBS-CRP synergizes localized bone metabolic profiles with systemic inflammatory biomarkers, achieving superior diagnostic accuracy. Caution is warranted in patients with severe bone loss and prolonged symptoms.
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.