Dataset Information

Implant Sonication versus Tissue Culture for the Diagnosis of Spinal Implant Infection.

ABSTRACT: MINI: We compared the sensitivity and specificity of peri-implant tissue culture to the vortexing-sonication technique for the diagnosis of spinal implant infection (SII). Lower thresholds of sonicate fluid culture positivity showed increased sensitivity with maintained specificity. We recommend a threshold of 20 CFU/10 mL for sonicate culture positivity for the diagnosis of SII.

Study design

This is a retrospective study comparing the diagnosis of spinal implant infection (SII) by peri-implant tissue culture to vortexing-sonication of retrieved spinal implants.

Objective

We hypothesized that vortexing-sonication would be more sensitive than peri-implant tissue culture.

Summary of background data

We previously showed implant vortexing-sonication followed by culture to be more sensitive than standard peri-implant tissue culture for diagnosing of SII. In this follow-up study, we analyzed the largest sample size available in the literature to compare these two culture methods and evaluated thresholds for positivity for sonicate fluid for SII diagnosis.

Methods

We compared peri-implant tissue culture to the vortexing-sonication technique which samples bacterial biofilm on the surface of retrieved spinal implants. We evaluated different thresholds for sonicate fluid positivity and assessed the sensitivity and specificity of the two culture methods for the diagnosis of SII.

Results

A total of 152 patients were studied. With more than 100 colony forming units (CFU)/10 mL as a threshold for sonicate fluid culture positivity, there were 46 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 65.2% and 79.6%; the specificities were 88.7% and 93.4%, respectively. With more than 50 CFU/10 mL as a threshold, there were 50 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 68.0% and 76.0%; the specificities were 92.2% for both methods. Finally, with more than or equal to 20 CFU/10 mL as a threshold, there were 52 patients with SII. The sensitivities of peri-implant tissue and sonicate fluid culture were 69.2% and 82.7%; the specificities were 94.0% and 92.0%, respectively.

Conclusion

Implant sonication followed by culture is a sensitive and specific method for the diagnosis of SII. Lower thresholds for defining sonicate fluid culture positivity allow for increased sensitivity with a minimal decrease in specificity, enhancing the clinical utility of implant sonication.

Level of evidence

SUBMITTER: Carlson BC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7158758 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:Culture of multiple periprosthetic tissue samples is the current gold standard for microbiological diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections (PJI). Additional diagnostic information may be obtained through culture of sonication fluid from explants. However, current techniques can have relatively low sensitivity, with prior antimicrobial therapy and infection by fastidious organisms influencing results. We assessed if metagenomic sequencing of total DNA extracts obtained direct from sonication fluid can provide an alternative rapid and sensitive tool for diagnosis of PJI. We compared metagenomic sequencing with standard aerobic and anaerobic culture in 97 sonication fluid samples from prosthetic joint and other orthopedic device infections. Reads from Illumina MiSeq sequencing were taxonomically classified using Kraken. Using 50 derivation samples, we determined optimal thresholds for the number and proportion of bacterial reads required to identify an infection and confirmed our findings in 47 independent validation samples. Compared to results from sonication fluid culture, the species-level sensitivity of metagenomic sequencing was 61/69 (88%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 77 to 94%; for derivation samples 35/38 [92%; 95% CI, 79 to 98%]; for validation samples, 26/31 [84%; 95% CI, 66 to 95%]), and genus-level sensitivity was 64/69 (93%; 95% CI, 84 to 98%). Species-level specificity, adjusting for plausible fastidious causes of infection, species found in concurrently obtained tissue samples, and prior antibiotics, was 85/97 (88%; 95% CI, 79 to 93%; for derivation samples, 43/50 [86%; 95% CI, 73 to 94%]; for validation samples, 42/47 [89%; 95% CI, 77 to 96%]). High levels of human DNA contamination were seen despite the use of laboratory methods to remove it. Rigorous laboratory good practice was required to minimize bacterial DNA contamination. We demonstrate that metagenomic sequencing can provide accurate diagnostic information in PJI. Our findings, combined with the increasing availability of portable, random-access sequencing technology, offer the potential to translate metagenomic sequencing into a rapid diagnostic tool in PJI.

Project description:BackgroundIn the absence of a gold standard criterion for diagnosing prosthetic joint infections (PJI), sonication of the removed implant may provide superior microbiological identification to synovial fluid and peri-implant tissue cultures. The aim of this retrospective study was to assess the role of sonication culture compared to tissue cultures for diagnosing PJI, using different consensus and international guidelines for PJI definition.MethodsData of 146 patients undergoing removal of hip or knee arthroplasties between 2010 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed. The International Consensus Meeting (ICM-2018), Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS), Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA), the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS), and a modified clinical criterion, were used to compare the performance of microbiological tests. McNemar´s test and proportion comparison were employed to calculate p-value.ResultsOverall, 56% (82/146) were diagnosed with PJI using the clinical criteria. Out of these cases, 57% (47/82) tested positive on tissue culture and 93% (76/82) on sonication culture. Applying this clinical criterion, the sensitivity of sonication fluid and tissue cultures was 92.7% (95% CI: 87.1%- 98.3%) and 57.3% (95% CI: 46.6%-68.0%) (p<0.001), respectively. When both methods were combined for diagnosis (sonication and tissue cultures) sensitivity reached 96.3% (95% CI: 91.5%-100%). Sonication culture and the combination of sonication with tissue cultures, showed higher sensitivity rates than tissue cultures alone for all diagnostic criteria (ICM-18, MSIS, IDSA and EBJIS) applied. Conversely, tissue culture provided greater specificity than sonication culture for all the criteria assessed, except for the EBJIS criteria, in which sonication and tissue cultures specificity was 100% and 95.3% (95% CI: 87.8-100%), respectively (p = 0.024).ConclusionsIn a context where diagnostic criteria available have shortcomings and tissue cultures remain the gold standard, sonication cultures can aid PJI diagnosis, especially when diagnostic criteria are inconclusive due to some important missing data (joint puncture, histology).

Project description:UNLABELLED:Despite known low sensitivity, culture of periprosthetic tissue specimens on agars and in broths is routine. Culture of periprosthetic tissue samples in blood culture bottles (BCBs) is potentially more convenient, but it has been evaluated in a limited way and has not been widely adopted. The aim of this study was to compare the sensitivity and specificity of inoculation of periprosthetic tissue specimens into blood culture bottles with standard agar and thioglycolate broth culture, applying Bayesian latent class modeling (LCM) in addition to applying the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) criteria for prosthetic joint infection. This prospective cohort study was conducted over a 9-month period (August 2013 to April 2014) at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, and included all consecutive patients undergoing revision arthroplasty. Overall, 369 subjects were studied; 117 (32%) met IDSA criteria for prosthetic joint infection, and 82% had late chronic infection. Applying LCM, inoculation of tissues into BCBs was associated with a 47% improvement in sensitivity compared to the sensitivity of conventional agar and broth cultures (92.1 versus 62.6%, respectively); this magnitude of change was similar when IDSA criteria were applied (60.7 versus 44.4%, respectively; P = 0.003). The time to microorganism detection was shorter with BCBs than with standard media (P < 0.0001), with aerobic and anaerobic BCBs yielding positive results within a median of 21 and 23 h, respectively. Results of our study demonstrate that the semiautomated method of periprosthetic tissue culture in blood culture bottles is more sensitive than and as specific as agar and thioglycolate broth cultures and yields results faster. IMPORTANCE:Prosthetic joint infections are a devastating complication of arthroplasty surgery. Despite this, current microbiological techniques to detect and diagnose infections are imperfect. This study examined a new approach to diagnosing infections, through the inoculation of tissue samples from around the prosthetic joint into blood culture bottles. This study demonstrated that, compared to current laboratory practices, this new technique increased the detection of infection. These findings are important for patient care to allow timely and accurate diagnosis of infection.