Plasma Fibrin Degradation Product and D-Dimer Are of Limited Value for Diagnosing Periprosthetic Joint Infection

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (10) ◽  
pp. 2454-2460 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong Xu ◽  
Jinwei Xie ◽  
Qiang Huang ◽  
Yiting Lei ◽  
Shaoyun Zhang ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Hong Xu ◽  
Jinwei Xie ◽  
Duan Wang ◽  
Qiang Huang ◽  
Zeyu Huang ◽  
...  

Abstract Background The preoperative diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in patients undergoing re-revision arthroplasty is crucial, so we evaluated whether plasma levels of D-dimer and fibrin degradation product (FDP) could aid such diagnosis. Methods We retrospectively analyzed data on patients who underwent re-revision hip or knee arthroplasty at our institute during 2008–2020. Patients were stratified into those who experienced PJI or not, based on 2013 International Consensus Meeting Criteria. Plasma levels of D-dimer and FDP as well as levels of the traditional inflammatory biomarkers C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and interleukin-6 were compared between the groups. The ability of these biomarkers to diagnose PJI was assessed based on the area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUC) curve, for which predictive cut-offs were optimized based on the Youden index. Results Based on a cut-off of 0.80 mg/L, D-dimer gave an AUC of 0.595, high sensitivity of 85.7% but poor specificity of 47.8%. Based on a cut-off of 2.80 mg/L, FDP gave an AUC of 0.550, poor sensitivity of 56.5% and poor specificity of 52.9%. CRP, ESR and interleukin-6 showed much better diagnostic ability, with AUCs > 0.82. The combination of CRP and interleukin-6 gave an AUC of 0.877, high sensitivity of 91.7% and acceptable specificity of 78.3%. Conclusions Plasma levels of D-dimer and FDP may be inappropriate for diagnosing PJI in patients undergoing re-revision arthroplasty, whereas the combination of serum CRP and interleukin-6 may be effective.


2019 ◽  
Vol 101 (7) ◽  
pp. 613-619 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui Li ◽  
Hong-Yi Shao ◽  
Li-Bo Hao ◽  
Bao-Zhan Yu ◽  
Peng-Fei Qu ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 230949902097186
Author(s):  
Baozhong Tian ◽  
Liwen Cui ◽  
Weihai Jiang

Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most common complication after artificial joint replacement as previously reported. However, the main problem at present is its difficulty in diagnosis. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of α-defensin, D-dimer, and interleukin-6 (IL-6) in clinical practice. Method: Online databases were systematically searched until June 18th, 2020 with keywords and medical sub-headings terms. Studies mentioned the sensitivity and specificity of biological markers in detecting PJI were included in our study. The sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratios (DORs) were obtained after integration. Results: A total of 34 studies with 1036 patients diagnosing as PJI were included for comparing α-defensin, D-dimer, and IL-6. The sensitivity and specificity of α-defensin for PJI were 0.88 and 0.96, and the DOR was 189 (95% CI 72–496), respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of D-dimer (0.82 and 0.72) and IL-6 (0.80 and 0.89) were lower than α-defensin. Conclusion: The detection of α-defensin is a promising biomarker for diagnosing PJI. The optional cut-off needs to be curtained when using other biomarkers.


Blood ◽  
1990 ◽  
Vol 76 (7) ◽  
pp. 1341-1348 ◽  
Author(s):  
CM Lawler ◽  
EG Bovill ◽  
DC Stump ◽  
DJ Collen ◽  
KG Mann ◽  
...  

Abstract The validity of markers in plasma of in vitro thrombolysis was investigated in 12 patients with extensive fibrinogen breakdown (greater than 80%, group 1) and in 12 patients with minimal breakdown (less than 20%, group 2). The patients were treated with 100 mg of recombinant tissue-type plasminogen activator (rt-PA) in the “Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction II” (TIMI II) trial. Cross- linked fibrin degradation product levels were measured with two variant enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays (ELISAs), both using a fibrin fragment D-dimer specific capture antibody. In one instance, a tag antibody was used that cross-reacts with fibrinogen (pan-specific tag ELISA); in the other, the tag antibody was specific for fibrin fragment D (fibrin-specific tag ELISA). Apparent concentrations of cross-linked fibrin degradation products at baseline were within normal limits with both assays in most patients. At 8 hours after rt-PA infusion, the measured cross-linked fibrin degradation products were increased about twofold to fourfold in group 2 with both assays. However, in group 1, levels were significantly higher with the pan-specific tag ELISA (5.8 +/- 4.2 micrograms/mL) compared with the fibrin-specific tag ELISA (1.5 +/- 1.3 micrograms/mL). This observation was most likely a result of detection of fibrinogen degradation products in the pan-specific ELISA. Apparent levels of fibrinopeptide B beta 1–42, a marker of fragment X formation, increased during thrombolysis from 4.2 +/- 2.8 pmol/mL to 2,000 +/- 230 pmol/mL in group 1 and from 4.1 +/- 2.1 pmol/mL to 300 +/- 43 pmol/mL in group 2, and were correlated significantly with the extent of fibrinogen breakdown (r = -0.8). Fibrinopeptide beta 15–42 levels increased from 4.3 +/- 3 pmol/mL to 70 +/- 19 pmol/mL in group 1, but did not increase in group 2. The apparent increase in group 1 could be explained by cross-reactivity of fibrinopeptide B beta 1–42 in the fibrinopeptide beta 15–42 assay. We conclude that cross-linked fibrin degradation product levels as measured with a pan-specific tag ELISA and fibrinopeptide beta 15–42 levels as measured with certain monoclonal antibody-based ELISA are influenced by the extent of fibrinogen degradation. Fibrinopeptide B beta 1–42 is a marker specific for fibrinogen breakdown. Cross-linked fibrin degradation product levels, measured with a fibrin-specific tag ELISA, appear to be markers specific for thrombolysis. Consequently, assays similar to the fibrin- specific tag ELISA may provide more accurate information when correlated with clinical endpoints.


2014 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 86-89
Author(s):  
Masashi MIYOSHI ◽  
Sadanobu MATSUDA ◽  
Chihiro INOUE ◽  
Norimichi TAKAMATSU ◽  
Toshio DOI

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheng Li ◽  
Donara Margaryan ◽  
Cristina Ojeda-Thies ◽  
Carsten Perka ◽  
Andrej Trampuz

Abstract Background The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic value of D-dimer in detecting periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Methods A systematic search and screen of relevant studies was performed in the PubMed, Web of Science and Embase databases using the following medical subject headings (MeSH) or keywords: “arthroplasty or joint prosthesis or joint replacement or periprosthetic joint or prosthetic joint”, “infection or infectious or infected”, and “D-dimer or serum D-dimer or plasma D-dimer or fibrin degradation products”. Then, the data were analysed and processed by Meta-Disc software. Results A total of 7 studies with 1285 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70 to 0.79), 0.69 (95% CI: 0.66 to 0.72), 3.01 (95% CI: 1.84 to 4.93), 0.32 (95% CI: 0.19 to 0.53) and 10.20 (95% CI: 3.63 to 28.64), respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that use of serum D-dimer had better sensitivity and specificity than plasma D-dimer for the diagnosis of PJI (0.86, 0.84 vs. 0.67, 0.60, respectively). Conclusion Serum D-dimer had a better diagnostic value than plasma D-dimer for the diagnosis of PJI.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheng Li ◽  
Donara Margaryan ◽  
Cristina Ojeda-Thies ◽  
Carsten Perka ◽  
Andrej Trampuz

Abstract Background The purpose of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the diagnostic value of D-dimer in detecting periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Methods A systematic search and screening of relevant studies was performed in the databases PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase using the following medical subject headings (MeSH) or keywords: “arthroplasty or joint prosthesis or joint replacement or periprosthetic joint or prosthetic joint”, “infection or infectious or infected”, and “D-dimer or serum D-dimer or plasma D-dimer or fibrin degradation products”. Data were subsequently analysed and processed using Meta-Disc. Results Seven studies with 1285 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, and diagnostic odds ratio were 0.75 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.70–0.79), 0.69 (95% CI: 0.66–0.72), 3.01 (95% CI: 1.84–4.93), 0.32 (95% CI: 0.19–0.53), and 10.20 (95% CI: 3.63–28.64), respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that the use of serum D-dimer had better sensitivity and specificity than plasma D-dimer for the diagnosis of PJI . Conclusion Serum D-dimer was shown to have a better diagnostic value than plasma D-dimer for the diagnosis of PJI. Further research is required for clarification.


2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheng Li ◽  
Donara Margaryan ◽  
Cristina Ojeda-Thies ◽  
Carsten Perka ◽  
Andrej Trampuz

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document