Qualitative Alpha-defensin Versus The Main Available Tests For The Diagnosis Of Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Best Predictor Test?

Abstract. Introduction: Biomarkers such as α-defensin demonstrated to be a potentially useful option in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis. Recently, a new point-of-care test for α-defensin level detection in synovial fluid has been commercialized in Europe. The aim of this study is to compare the α-defensin test (SynovasureTM) diagnostic ability with the main available clinical tests for periprosthetic joint infection diagnosis in a practical clinical setting of a Bone Infection Unit.Methods: Between 2015 and 2017, 146 patients with suspected chronic PJI were screened with SynovasureTM. Seventy-three of these met the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria and were included in the analysis. According to MSIS criteria, 40 patients (54.7%) were classified as infected and 33 (45.3%) as not infected. The results obtained with SynovasureTM were recorded and compared with standard diagnostic methods for PJI diagnosis.Results: SynovasureTM showed a sensitivity of 85.0 % (95% CI 70.2 to 94.3) and a specificity of 96.9 % (95% CI 83.8 to 99.9) for PJI detection. The positive likelihood ratio of SynovasureTM was 27.2 (95% CI 3.9 to 188.1) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.2 (95% CI 0.1 to 0.3). The diagnostic odds ratio was 181.3 (95% CI 20.7 to 1590.4). SynovasureTM demonstrated a statistical significant difference when compared to Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) and C-reactive Protein (CRP) specificity (at least one positive test) and preoperative culture sensitivity (1 positive culture).Conclusion: Our findings show that SynovasureTM sensitivity is lower than quantitative α-D test, but when compared to the main available tests shows a good specificity and the highest DOR. On the SF it is the easier test to do, due to the fact that it needs a minimal amount of SF and it is not limited by blood contamination or antibiotic use. Whereas there is no single standalone test, SynovasureTM should be considered a reliable additional test for periprosthetic joint infection diagnosis in everyday clinical practice.

Download Full-text

Meta-analysis of sonicate fluid in blood culture bottles for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection

Journal of Bone and Joint Infection ◽

10.7150/jbji.29731 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 3 (5) ◽

pp. 273-279 ◽

Cited By ~ 11

Author(s):

Cheng Li ◽

Nora Renz ◽

Cristina Ojeda Thies ◽

Andrej Trampuz

Keyword(s):

Blood Culture ◽

Likelihood Ratio ◽

Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Joint Infection ◽

Area Under The Curve ◽

Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽

Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽

Diagnostic Methods ◽

Summary Receiver Operating Characteristic

Abstract. Introduction: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is the most serious complication after arthroplasty, and the diagnosis of PJI is still challenging with modern medical technology. To improve the diagnostic rate, combined diagnostic methods are gradually beginning to be used to diagnose PJI. Sonication is one accurate way to diagnose PJI, but there is minimal research regarding the diagnostic value of sonicate fluid (SF) in blood culture bottles (BCB). Therefore, we evaluated this combined diagnostic method by meta-analysis.Methods: We searched English publications in electronic databases regarding the use of sonicate fluid in blood culture bottles (SF-BCB) for diagnosing PJI, screened the literature according to inclusion criteria, assessed the quality of the selected literature, and collected information regarding SF-BCB.Results: This meta-analysis includes 4 studies that evaluated SF-BCB for the diagnosis of PJI. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR) and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) are 0.85 (95% Confidence interval [CI], 0.77 to 0.91), 0.86 (CI, 0.81 to 0.91), 5.34 (CI, 3.13 to 9.11), 0.16 (CI, 0.06 to 0.48) and 39.01 (CI, 9.04 to 168.35), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) of the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) is 0.9186 (standard error, 0.0205).Conclusion: SF-BCB has great value for the microbiological diagnosis of PJ, especially for patients with prior antibiotic treatment.

Download Full-text

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

10.21203/rs.2.21286/v1 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

10.21203/rs.2.21286/v2 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Diagnostic Accuracy of D-Dimer in Periprosthetic Joint Infection: a diagnostic meta-analysis

10.21203/rs.3.rs-29766/v1 ◽

2020 ◽

Author(s):

Haitao Zhang ◽

Xiaobo Sun ◽

Pengfei Xin ◽

Xingyang Zhu ◽

Ke Jie ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diagnostic Accuracy ◽

Likelihood Ratio ◽

Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Joint Infection ◽

Random Effect Model ◽

Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽

Diagnostic Methods ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

D Dimer

Abstract Background: Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most devastating complications after total joint replacement. Up to now, the diagnosis of PJI is still in a dilemma. As a novel biomarker, whether D-Dimer is valuable in the diagnosis of PJI remains controversial. This meta-analysis attempts to determine the diagnostic accuracy of D-Dimer in PJI.Methods: Relevant literature was retrieved from PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library (from database establishment to April 2020). Literature quality was evaluated using Revman (Version 5.3). The random effect model was used in Stata version 14.0 software to combine sensitivity, specificity, likelihood ratio (LR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve and area under SROC (AUC) to evaluate the diagnostic value of overall D-Dimer for PJI. Meta regression and subgroup analysis were performed according to the threshold, the study design, the sample size, the diagnostic gold standard, the country of study, and the type of sample.Results:A total of 9 studies were included in this study, including 1592 patients. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of D-Dimer for PJI diagnosis are 0.82(95%CI, 0.72~0.89) and 0.73(95%CI, 0.58~0.83), respectively. The pooled positive likelihood ratio (PLR) and negative likelihood ratio (NLR) were 2.99 (95%CI, 1.84~4.88) and 0.25 (95%CI, 0.15~0.41), respectively. The pooled AUC and diagnostic odds ratios were 0.85 (95%CI, 0.82~0.88) and 12.20 (95% CI, 4.98~29.86), respectively.Conclusion: D-Dimer is a promising biomarker for the diagnosis of PJI, which should be used in conjunction with other biomarkers or as an adjunct to other diagnostic methods to enhance diagnostic performance.

Download Full-text

Diagnostic accuracy of calprotectin in periprosthetic joint infection: a diagnostic meta-analysis

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research ◽

10.1186/s13018-021-02895-4 ◽

2022 ◽

Vol 17 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Jisi Xing ◽

Jiahao Li ◽

Zijian Yan ◽

Yijin Li ◽

Xiaofang Liu ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Likelihood Ratio ◽

Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Characteristic Curve ◽

Joint Infection ◽

Area Under The Curve ◽

Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽

Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Sensitivity Specificity

Abstract Background Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is considered to be one of the most challenging complications of joint replacement, which remains unpredictable. As a simple and emerging biomarker, calprotectin (CLP) has been considered to be useful in ruling out PJI in recent years. The purpose of this study was to investigate the accuracy and sensitivity of CLP in the diagnosis of PJI. Methods We searched and screened the publications from PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library from database establishment to June 2021. Subsequently, Stata version 16.0 software was used to combine the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), operating characteristic curve, and area under the curve (AUC). Heterogeneity across articles was evaluated by the I2 statistics. Finally, sources of heterogeneity were detected by subgroup analysis based on study design, detection method, sample size, and cutoff values. Results A total of 7 studies were included in our study, comprising 525 patients. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, and NLR of CLP for PJI diagnosis were 0.94(95% CI 0.87–0.98), 0.93(95% CI 0.87–0.96), 13.65(95% CI 6.89–27.08), and 0.06(95% CI 0.02–0.15), respectively, while the DOR and AUC were 222.33(95% CI 52.52–941.11) and 0.98 (95% CI 0.96–0.99), respectively. Conclusion Synovial CLP is a reliable biomarker and can be used as a diagnostic criterion for PJI in the future. However, the uncertainty resulting from the poor study numbers and sample sizes limit our ability to definitely draw conclusions on the basis of our study.

Download Full-text

Reliability of circulating fibrinogen in the diagnosis of prosthesis-related infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Journal of Orthopaedic Surgery and Research ◽

10.1186/s13018-020-02171-x ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Xingyang Zhu ◽

Haitao Zhang ◽

Xiaobo Sun ◽

Yijin Li ◽

Jiahao Li ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Likelihood Ratio ◽

Meta Analysis ◽

Joint Infection ◽

Area Under The Curve ◽

Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽

Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽

Diagnostic Odds Ratio ◽

Small Sample ◽

Cochrane Library ◽

Sensitivity Specificity

Abstract Background Fibrinogen (FIB) has recently been used as a biomarker to diagnose periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), but its reliability is still questionable. The aim of this study was to investigate the accuracy of FIB in the diagnosis of PJI after joint replacement. Methods We searched for literatures published in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library from the time of database inception to September 2020 and screened the studies according to the inclusion criteria. Then, we calculated the diagnostic parameters of FIB, including the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), area under the curve (AUC), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR). In addition, we implemented subgroup analyses to identify the sources of heterogeneity. Results Seven studies including 1341 patients were selected in our meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, PLR, NLR, and DOR of FIB for PJI diagnosis were 0.78 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73–0.82), 0.83 (95% CI, 0.81–0.86), 4.60 (95% CI, 3.30–6.42), 0.24 (95% CI, 0.18–0.34), and 20.13 (95% CI, 14.80–27.36), respectively, while the AUC was 0.896. Conclusion The present study indicated that FIB was a reliable detection method and might be introduced into the diagnostic criteria for PJI. However, more robust studies are still needed to confirm the current findings, because most of the included studies were retrospective and had small sample sizes.

Download Full-text

A meta-analysis of narrow-band imaging for the diagnosis of primary nasopharyngeal carcinoma

F1000Research ◽

10.12688/f1000research.15183.1 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 7 ◽

pp. 759 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

David CM Yeung ◽

Alexander C Vlantis ◽

Eddy WY Wong ◽

Michael CF Tong ◽

Jason YK Chan

Keyword(s):

Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma ◽

Likelihood Ratio ◽

White Light ◽

Narrow Band ◽

Narrow Band Imaging ◽

Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽

Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽

Detection Rates ◽

White Light Endoscopy ◽

Significant Difference

Background: Narrow band imaging (NBI), an endoscopic technique featuring an augmented definition of microvasculature and mucosal patterns. NBI is increasingly advocated as a tool to characterize neoplasia and intestinal metaplasia in endoscopic standards, such as for colorectal polyps and tumors. Recently NBI has also been studied in the detection of Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma (NPC). Here we aimed to assess the diagnostic utility of NBI for the diagnosis of NPC. Methods: A meta-analysis of studies comparing narrow-band imaging and white light endoscopy in the diagnosis of primary nasopharyngeal carcinoma was performed. The review process involved two independent investigators. The databases used were MEDLINE, PubMed, the Cochrane library, Embase, and the Web of Science. Statistical analysis was performed with OpenMetaAnalyst, MetaDiSc version 1.4, and Medcalc version 17.9.7. Results: Five studies including 2480 patients were included. The sensitivity and specificity for narrow-band imaging were 0.90 (0.73-0.97) and 0.95 (0.81-0.99) respectively. The positive likelihood ratio and negative likelihood ratio were 18.82 (0.31-82.1) and 0.08 (0.02-0.31). For white light endoscopy, the sensitivity and specificity were 0.77 (0.58-0.89) and 0.91 (0.79-0.96). The positive likelihood ratio was 7.61 (3.61-16.04), and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.21 (0.11-0.39). The odds ratio for detection rates between narrow-band imaging and white light endoscopy was 4.29 (0.56-33.03, p = 0.16). Area under the curve for narrow-band imaging was 0.98 (SE: 0.02), and for white light it was 0.93 (SE: 0.03). There was no significant difference in the receiver operating characteristic curves between the two modalities (p = 0.14). Conclusion: Narrow-band imaging showed a higher sensitivity and positive likelihood ratio for the diagnosis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma. However, there was no significant difference in detection rates compared to white light endoscopy. Further investigation with a uniform diagnostic criteria and terminology is needed for narrow-band imaging in the diagnosis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma.

Download Full-text

Next-generation sequencing not superior to culture in periprosthetic joint infection diagnosis

The Bone & Joint Journal ◽

10.1302/0301-620x.103b1.bjj-2020-0017.r3 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 103-B (1) ◽

pp. 26-31

Author(s):

Beau J. Kildow ◽

Sean P. Ryan ◽

Richard Danilkowicz ◽

Alexander L. Lazarides ◽

Colin Penrose ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Next Generation Sequencing ◽

Periprosthetic Joint Infection ◽

Joint Infection ◽

Next Generation ◽

Sample Collection ◽

Tissue Samples ◽

Musculoskeletal Infection ◽

Conventional Culture ◽

Significant Difference ◽

Generation Sequencing

Aims Use of molecular sequencing methods in periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis and organism identification have gained popularity. Next-generation sequencing (NGS) is a potentially powerful tool that is now commercially available. The purpose of this study was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of NGS, polymerase chain reaction (PCR), conventional culture, the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria, and the recently proposed criteria by Parvizi et al in the diagnosis of PJI. Methods In this retrospective study, aspirates or tissue samples were collected in 30 revision and 86 primary arthroplasties for routine diagnostic investigation for PJI and sent to the laboratory for NGS and PCR. Concordance along with statistical differences between diagnostic studies were calculated. Results Using the MSIS criteria to diagnose PJI as the reference standard, the sensitivity and specificity of NGS were 60.9% and 89.9%, respectively, while culture resulted in sensitivity of 76.9% and specificity of 95.3%. PCR had a low sensitivity of 18.4%. There was no significant difference based on sample collection method (tissue swab or synovial fluid) (p = 0.760). There were 11 samples that were culture-positive and NGS-negative, of which eight met MSIS criteria for diagnosing infection. Conclusion In our series, NGS did not provide superior sensitivity or specificity results compared to culture. PCR has little utility as a standalone test for PJI diagnosis with a sensitivity of only 18.4%. Currently, several laboratory tests for PJI diagnosis should be obtained along with the overall clinical picture to help guide decision-making for PJI treatment. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(1):26–31.

Download Full-text

The Diagnostic Accuracy of Cytology for the Diagnosis of Hepatobiliary and Pancreatic Cancers

Acta Cytologica ◽

10.1159/000489549 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 62 (4) ◽

pp. 311-316

Author(s):

Marwan Al-Hajeili ◽

Maryam Alqassas ◽

Astabraq Alomran ◽

Bashaer Batarfi ◽

Bashaer Basunaid ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Diagnostic Accuracy ◽

Likelihood Ratio ◽

Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽

Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽

Biliary Tree ◽

Needle Aspiration ◽

Diagnostic Methods ◽

Likelihood Ratios ◽

Predictive Values ◽

Histological Confirmation

Objective: Although cytology testing is considered a valuable method to diagnose tumors that are difficult to access such as hepato-biliary-pancreatic (HBP) malignancies, its diagnostic accuracy remains unclear. We therefore aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of cytology testing for HBP tumors. Study Design: We performed a retrospective study of all cytology samples that were used to confirm radiologically detected HBP tumors between 2002 and 2016. The cytology techniques used in our center included fine needle aspiration (FNA), brush cytology, and aspiration of bile. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and likelihood ratios were calculated in comparison to histological confirmation. Results: From a total of 133 medical records, we calculated an overall sensitivity of 76%, specificity of 74%, a negative likelihood ratio of 0.30, and a positive likelihood ratio of 2.9. Cytology was more accurate in diagnosing lesions of the liver (sensitivity 79%, specificity 57%) and biliary tree (sensitivity 100%, specificity 50%) compared to pancreatic (sensitivity 60%, specificity 83%) and gallbladder lesions (sensitivity 50%, specificity 85%). Cytology was more accurate in detecting primary cancers (sensitivity 77%, specificity 73%) when compared to metastatic cancers (sensitivity 73%, specificity 100%). FNA was the most frequently used cytological technique to diagnose HBP lesions (sensitivity 78.8%). Conclusion: Cytological testing is efficient in diagnosing HBP cancers, especially for hepatobiliary tumors. Given its relative simplicity, cost-effectiveness, and paucity of alternative diagnostic methods, cytology should still be considered as a first-line tool for diagnosing HBP malignancies.

Download Full-text

Reliability of the Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire for Identifying Symptomatic PAD in General Practice

Angiology ◽

10.1177/0003319720984882 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 000331972098488

Author(s):

Luke Boylan ◽

Craig Nesbitt ◽

Lesley Wilson ◽

John Allen ◽

Andrew Sims ◽

...

Keyword(s):

General Practice ◽

Likelihood Ratio ◽

Positive Likelihood Ratio ◽

Negative Likelihood Ratio ◽

Diagnostic Methods ◽

Test Accuracy ◽

Reference Standard ◽

Ultrasound Scanning ◽

Vascular Ultrasound ◽

North East

The Edinburgh Claudication Questionnaire (ECQ) was developed to help identify peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in the general population but has not been validated against diagnostic arterial imaging methods such as Duplex Vascular Ultrasound Scanning (DUS). In the present study, we assessed the accuracy of the ECQ for diagnosis using DUS. As part of a National Institute of Health Research funded project looking at novel diagnostic methods, 250 patients were studied from 15 general practices across North East England from May 2015 and November 2016. Practices identified those with a PAD diagnosis from their registers as well as age- and sex-matched controls. All the ECQs were recorded by a vascular specialist nurse. Duplex vascular ultrasound scanning was used as a reference standard for the diagnosis of occlusive PAD. The ECQ had a sensitivity of 52.5% (95% CI: 42.3%-62.5%), specificity of 87.1% (95% CI: 80.6%-92.0%), positive likelihood ratio of 4.06 (95% CI: 2.57-6.42), and negative likelihood ratio of 0.55 (95% CI: 0.44-0.68) compared with reference standard DUS. The ECQ has relatively poor overall diagnostic test accuracy in isolation. It may be helpful in ruling out PAD or as a supplementary test to improve diagnosis of symptomatic disease in General Practice.

Download Full-text