Researchers Assess Serum D-Dimer in Diagnosing Periprosthetic Joint Infection

2019 ◽  
Vol 25 (11) ◽  
pp. 126-127
Keyword(s):  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
D Dimer

Plasma Fibrinogen Exhibits Better Performance Than Plasma D-Dimer in the Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection

2019 ◽  
Vol 101 (7) ◽  
pp. 613-619 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rui Li ◽  
Hong-Yi Shao ◽  
Li-Bo Hao ◽  
Bao-Zhan Yu ◽  
Peng-Fei Qu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Plasma Fibrinogen ◽  
D Dimer

scholarly journals The diagnostic effect of α-defensin, D-dimer, and IL-6 in periprosthetic joint infection: A systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 28 (3) ◽  
pp. 230949902097186
Author(s):  
Baozhong Tian ◽  
Liwen Cui ◽  
Weihai Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Sensitivity And Specificity ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Common Complication ◽  
Online Databases ◽  
Artificial Joint Replacement ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity ◽  
D Dimer

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.

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 ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Degradation Product ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Fibrin Degradation Product ◽  
D Dimer

scholarly journals Meta-analysis of serum and/or plasma D-dimer in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheng Li ◽  
Donara Margaryan ◽  
Cristina Ojeda-Thies ◽  
Carsten Perka ◽  
Andrej Trampuz
Keyword(s):  
Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Degradation Products ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Medical Subject Headings ◽  
D Dimer

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.

scholarly journals Meta-analysis of serum and/or plasma D-dimer in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheng Li ◽  
Donara Margaryan ◽  
Cristina Ojeda-Thies ◽  
Carsten Perka ◽  
Andrej Trampuz
Keyword(s):  
Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Degradation Products ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Medical Subject Headings ◽  
D Dimer

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.

scholarly journals Meta-analysis of serum and/or plasma D-dimer in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection

2020 ◽  
Vol 15 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Cheng Li ◽  
Donara Margaryan ◽  
Cristina Ojeda-Thies ◽  
Carsten Perka ◽  
Andrej Trampuz
Keyword(s):  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
D Dimer

The role of D-dimer in periprosthetic joint infection: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Diagnosis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Giovanni Balato ◽  
Cristiano De Franco ◽  
Fiamma Balboni ◽  
Vincenzo De Matteo ◽  
Tiziana Ascione ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Diagnostic Accuracy ◽  
Blood Sample ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽  
Diagnostic Odds Ratio ◽  
Receiver Operating Curve ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity ◽  
D Dimer

Abstract Objectives The current literature on diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) provides controversial evidence on the diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer. Therefore, this critical literature search and meta-analysis was aimed to summarize the diagnostic accuracy of D-dimer for diagnosing PJI. Content We searched MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science, for studies on D-dimer for diagnosing PJI, according to the PRISMA flowchart. QUADAS was used for assessing study quality. Sensitivity, specificity, positive (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were analyzed using bivariate diagnostic random-effects model. The area under the receiver-operating curve (AUC-ROC) was calculated. Subgroup analysis and univariate meta-regression were carried out for detecting potential sources of heterogeneity. Summary We included 12 articles, totaling 1,818 patients (539 with PJI). The pooled sensitivity and specificity of D-dimer for diagnosing PJI were 0.739 (95% CI: 0.616–0.833) and 0.785 (95% CI: 0.679–0.863). The pooled PLR, NLR, DOR were 3.359 (95% CI, 2.340–4.821), 0.295 (95% CI, 0.180–0.484), and 11.787 (95% CI, 5.785–24.018). The cumulative ROC plot displayed an AUC of 0.688 (95% CI, 0.663–0.713; p<0.001). No threshold effects could be observed. The type of blood sample was identified as possible source of heterogeneity for DOR (p=0.01). Outlook Evidence emerged from this meta-analysis suggests that D-dimer displays sufficient diagnostic accuracy to rule out PJI. The type of blood sample (plasma vs. serum) and the study design could influence the results in terms of DOR and sensitivity. However, further perspective studies would be needed to validate its potential diagnostic usefulness.

Is D-dimer a Reliable Serum Marker for Shoulder Periprosthetic Joint Infection?

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Zmistowski ◽  
Michael Chang ◽  
Alisina Shahi ◽  
Thema Nicholson ◽  
Joseph Abboud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Serum Marker ◽  
D Dimer

scholarly journals Different diagnostic performance of plasma fibrinogen and D-dimer in periprosthetic joint infection: a propensity score matched study

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xi Chen ◽  
Wenwei Qian ◽  
Xisheng Weng ◽  
Jin Lin ◽  
Jin Jin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Propensity Score ◽  
Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽  
Predictive Value ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Joint Infection ◽  
Diagnostic Value ◽  
Different Types ◽  
Culture Positive ◽  
Culture Negative ◽  
D Dimer

Abstract Background Fibrinogen (Fbg) and D-dimer have been used as biomarkers for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). However, previous research has reported conflicting results on the diagnostic value of D-dimer in comparison to Fbg, C-reactive protein (CRP), and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR). Aim This study aimed to: (1) determine the optimal threshold of plasma Fbg and D-dimer in the diagnosis of PJI and compare their diagnostic value to that of CRP and ESR; and (2) investigate whether Fbg and D-dimer perform differently than CRP and ESR as diagnostic indicators for different types of PJI. Methods A total of 115 revision cases after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA) were identified. Based on demographic characteristics, 25 culture-positive cases were matched to 50 culture-negative cases using propensity score matching. Sensitivity, specificity, receiver operating characteristics (ROC), negative predictive value (NPV), and positive predictive value (PPV) were calculated and compared. Results The optimal thresholds were 2.72 mg/L for D-dimer, 3.655 g/L for Fbg, 12.64 mg/L for CRP, and 27 mm/h for ESR. Levels of plasma Fbg, D-dimer, CRP, and ESR were significantly higher in the culture-positive group than the culture-negative group. Fbg, D-dimer, CRP, and ESR showed sensitivity of 0.92, 0.56, 0.92, and 0.88, respectively, and showed specificity of 0.84, 0.96, 0.94, and 0.80, respectively. The ROC curve showed that CRP has the highest area under the curve (AUC) (0.94), followed by Fbg (0.90), ESR (0.87), and D-dimer (0.81). Conclusions Plasma Fbg exhibited a similar diagnostic performance compared to CRP and ESR in predicting culture-positive results in PJI. Plasma D-dimer showed high specificity but low sensitivity. In our study, Fbg and D-dimer did not show better diagnostic performance with different pathogens and different types of PJI. Further studies are required to investigate the difference between serum D-dimer and plasma D-dimer in the arthroplasty population.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document