Dataset Information

Twenty common errors in the diagnosis and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Misconceptions and errors in the management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can compromise the treatment success. The goal of this paper is to systematically describe twenty common mistakes in the diagnosis and management of PJI, to help surgeons avoid these pitfalls. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Common diagnostic and treatment errors are described, analyzed and interpreted. RESULTS:Diagnostic errors include the use of serum inflammatory biomarkers (such as C-reactive protein) to rule out PJI, incomplete evaluation of joint aspirate, and suboptimal microbiological procedures (such as using swabs or collection of insufficient number of periprosthetic samples). Further errors are missing possible sources of distant infection in hematogenous PJI or overreliance on suboptimal diagnostic criteria which can hinder or delay the diagnosis of PJI or mislabel infections as aseptic failure. Insufficient surgical treatment or inadequate antibiotic treatment are further reasons for treatment failure and emergence of antimicrobial resistance. Finally, wrong surgical indication, both underdebridement and overdebridement or failure to individualize treatment can jeopardize surgical results. CONCLUSION:Multidisciplinary teamwork with infectious disease specialists and microbiologists in collaboration with orthopedic surgeons have a synergistic effect on the management of PJI. An awareness of the possible pitfalls can improve diagnosis and treatment results.

SUBMITTER: Li C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6938795 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Twenty common errors in the diagnosis and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection.

Li Cheng C Renz Nora N Trampuz Andrej A Ojeda-Thies Cristina C

International orthopaedics 20191022 1

<h4>Background</h4>Misconceptions and errors in the management of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can compromise the treatment success. The goal of this paper is to systematically describe twenty common mistakes in the diagnosis and management of PJI, to help surgeons avoid these pitfalls.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>Common diagnostic and treatment errors are described, analyzed and interpreted.<h4>Results</h4>Diagnostic errors include the use of serum inflammatory biomarkers (such as C-re ...[more]

PMID: 31641803

Similar Datasets

Project description:Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), a devastating complication of total joint replacement, is of incompletely understood pathogenesis and may sometimes be challenging to clinically distinguish from other causes of arthroplasty failure. We characterized human gene expression in 93 specimens derived from surfaces of resected arthroplasties, comparing transcriptomes of subjects with infection- versus non-infection-associated arthroplasty failure. Differential gene expression analysis confirmed 28 previously reported potential biomarkers of PJI, including bactericidal/permeability increasing protein (BPI), cathelicidin antimicrobial peptide (CAMP), C-C-motif chemokine ligand 3 (CCL3), 4(CCL4), and C-X-C-motif chemokine ligand 2 (CXCL2), colony stimulating factor 2 receptor beta (CSF2RB), colony stimulating factor 3 (CSF3), alpha-defensin (DEFA4), Fc fragment of IgG receptor 1B (CD64B), intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM1), interferon gamma (IFNG), interleukin 13 receptor subunit alpha 2 (IL13RA2), interleukin 17D (IL17D), interleukin 1 (IL1A, IL1B, IL1RN), interleukin 2 receptors (IL2RA, IL2RG), interleukin 5 receptor (IL5RA), interleukin 6 (IL6), interleukin 8 (IL8), lipopolysaccharide binding protein (LBP), lipocalin (LCN2), lactate dehydrogenase C (LDHC), lactotransferrin (LTF), matrix metallopeptidase 3 (MMP3), peptidase inhibitor 3 (PI3), and vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGFA), and identified three novel molecules of potential diagnostic use for detection of PJI, namely C-C-motif chemokine ligand CCL20, coagulation factor VII (F7), and B cell receptor FCRL4. Comparative analysis of infections caused by staphylococci versus bacteria other than staphylococci and Staphylococcus aureus versus Staphylococcus epidermidis showed elevated expression of interleukin 13 (IL13), IL17D, and MMP3 in staphylococcal infections, and of IL1B, IL8, and platelet factor PF4V1 in S. aureus compared to S. epidermidis infections. Pathway analysis of over-represented genes suggested activation of host immune response and cellular maintenance and repair functions in response to invasion of infectious agents. The data presented provides new potential targets for diagnosis of PJI and for differentiation of PJI caused by different infectious agents.

Project description:BackgroundCulture-negative periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) are often false diagnosed as aseptic implant failure leading to unnecessary revision surgeries due to repeated infections. A marker to increase the security of e PJI diagnosis is therefore of great importance. The aim of this study was to test C9 immunostaining of periprosthetic tissue as a novel tissue-biomarker for a more reliable identification of PJI, as well as potential cross-reactivity.MethodWe included 98 patients in this study undergoing septic or aseptic revision surgeries. Standard microbiological diagnosis was performed in all cases for classification of patients. Serum parameters including C-reactive protein (CRP) serum levels and white blood cell (WBC) count were included, and the periprosthetic tissue was immunostained for C9 presence. The amount of C9 tissue staining was evaluated in septic versus aseptic tissue and the amount of C9 staining was correlated with the different pathogens causing the infection. To exclude cross-reactions between C9 immunostaining and other inflammatory joint conditions, we included tissue samples of a separate cohort with rheumatoid arthritis, wear particles and chondrocalcinosis.ResultsThe microbiological diagnosis detected PJI in 58 patients; the remaining 40 patients were classified as aseptic. Serum CRP values were significantly increased in the PJI cohort. Serum WBC was not different between septic and aseptic cases. We found a significant increase in C9 immunostaining in the PJI periprosthetic tissue. To test the predictive value of C9 as biomarker for PJI we performed a ROC analyses. According to the Youden's criteria C9 is a very good biomarker for PJI detection with a sensitivity of 89% and a specificity of 75% and an AUC of 0.84. We did not observe a correlation of C9 staining with the pathogen causing the PJI. However, we observed a cross reactivity with the inflammatory joint disease like rheumatoid arthritis and different metal wear types. In addition, we did not observe a cross reactivity with chondrocalcinosis.ConclusionOur study identifies C9 as a potential tissue-biomarker for the identification of PJI using immunohistological staining of tissue biopsies. The use of C9 staining could help to reduce the number of false negative diagnoses of PJI.

Project description:The volume of joint replacement surgery has risen steadily in recent years, because the population is aging and increasingly wishes to reserve a high functional status onward into old age. Infection is among the more common complications of joint replacement surgery, arising in 0.2% to 2% of patients, or as many as 9% in special situations such as the implantation of megaprostheses. The associated morbidity and mortality are high. It is thus very important to minimize risk factors for infection and to optimize the relevant diagnostic and therapeutic strategies.This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed, including current guidelines and expert recommendations.The crucial diagnostic step is joint biopsy for the identification of the pathogenic organism, which succeeds with over 90% sensitivity and specificity. If the prosthesis is firmly anchored in bone, the pathogen is of a type that responds well to treatment, and symptomatic infection has been present only for a short time, then rapidly initiated treatment can save the prosthesis in 35-90% of cases. The pillars of treatment are thorough surgical care (radical débridement) and targeted antibiotic therapy. On the other hand, if the prosthesis is loose or the pathogen is of a poorly treatable type, the infection can generally only be cured by a change of the prosthesis. This can be performed in either one or two procedures, always in conjunction with systemic antibiotic therapy tailored to the specific sensitivity and resistance pattern of the pathogen.The risk of infection of an artificial joint is low, but the overall prevalence of such infections is significant, as the number of implanted joints is steadily rising. Artificial joint infections should be treated by a standardized algorithm oriented toward the recommendations of current guidelines. Many of these recommendations, however, are based only on expert opinion, as informative studies providing high-grade evidence are lacking. Thus, for any particular clinical situation, there may now be multiple therapeutic approaches with apparently comparable efficacy. Randomized trials are urgently needed.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Sonication is a valuable tool in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). However, conditions and definition criteria for PJI vary among studies. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic performance (i.e., specificity, sensitivity) of sonicate fluid culture (SFC) against periprosthetic tissue culture (PTC), when using European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) criteria. METHODS:From March 2017 to April 2018, 257 implants were submitted for sonication. PJI was defined according to the EBJIS criteria as well as according to the International Consensus Meeting criteria of 2018 (ICM 2018). Only cases with at least one corresponding tissue sample were included. Samples were cultured using traditional microbiological plating techniques. Sensitivity and specificity were determined using two-by-two contingency tables. McNemar's test was used to compare proportions among paired samples. Subgroup analysis was performed dividing the cohort according to the site of PJI, previous antibiotic treatment, and time of manifestation. Prevalence of pathogens was determined for all patients as well as for specific subgroups. RESULTS:Among the 257 cases, 145 and 112 were defined as PJI and aseptic failure, respectively. When using the EBJIS criteria, the sensitivity of SFC and PTC was 69.0 and 62.8%, respectively (p =?.04). Meanwhile, the specificity was 90.2 and 92.9%, respectively (p =?.65). When adopting ICM 2018 criteria, the sensitivity of SFC and PTC was 87.5 and 84.4% (p =?.63) respectively, while the specificity was 85.1 and 92.5% (p =?.05), respectively. The most commonly identified pathogens were coagulase-negative staphylococci (26% overall), while 31% of PJI were culture-negative and 9% polymicrobial. CONCLUSIONS:SFC exhibited significantly greater sensitivity versus PTC when using the EBJIS criteria. Nevertheless, the diagnosis of PJI remains a difficult challenge and different diagnostic tools are necessary to optimize the outcome.

Dataset Information

Twenty common errors in the diagnosis and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection.

Publications

Twenty common errors in the diagnosis and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets