This study aimed to evaluate the BioFire Joint Infection (JI) Panel in cases of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) where conventional microbiology is unclear, and to assess its role as a complementary intraoperative diagnostic tool. Five groups representing common microbiological scenarios in hip and knee revision arthroplasty were selected from our arthroplasty registry, prospectively maintained PJI databases, and biobank: 1) unexpected-negative cultures (UNCs), 2) unexpected-positive cultures (UPCs), 3) single-positive intraoperative cultures (SPCs), and 4) clearly septic and 5) aseptic cases. In total, 268 archived synovial fluid samples from 195 patients who underwent acute/chronic revision total hip or knee arthroplasty were included. Cases were classified according to the International Consensus Meeting 2018 criteria. JI panel evaluation of synovial fluid was performed, and the results were compared with cultures.Aims
Methods
Synovial calprotectin point-of-care test (POC) has shown promising clinical value in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). However, limited data are available in unclear cases. Moreover, cut-off values for calprotectin lateral flow assay (LFA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) need to be adapted. The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of an upgraded and more sensitive version of a synovial calprotectin LFA along with ELISA immunoassay in patients with septic, aseptic, and unclear cases. Overall, 206 prospectively collected periprosthetic synovial fluid samples from 169 patients (106f/63m; 38 hip/131 knee) who underwent revision surgeries were retrospectively evaluated for calprotectin concentration. The following groups were analyzed: unexpected negative cultures (UNC; 32/206), unexpected positive cultures (UPC; 28/206), and unclear cases (65/206) with conflicting clinical results. In addition, we added a true aseptic (40/206), and true septic (41/206) control groups according to the international consensus meeting (ICM) 2018 PJI classification. Calprotectin concentration was determined by a rapid quantitative LFA (n=206) (Lyfstone®, Norway), and compared to calprotectin ELISA immunoassay (171/206). For the determination of a new calprotectin cut-off value, analysis of the area under the curve (AUC) followed by Youden's J statistic were performed using the calproctectin values from clear septic and aseptic cases. Sensitivity and specificity for calprotectin were calculated. All statistical analyses were performed using IBM-SPSS® version 25 (Armonk, NY, USA).Aim
Methods
