Current guidelines for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) recommend collecting 4–5 independent tissue specimens, with isolation of indistinguishable organisms from two or more specimens. The same principle has been applied to other orthopaedic device-related infections (DRI) including fracture-related infections. However there are few published data validating this approach in DRI other than PJI. We evaluated the performance of different diagnostic cutoffs and varying numbers of tissue specimens for microbiological sampling in fracture-related infections. We used standard protocols for tissue sample collection and laboratory processing, and a standard clinical definition of fracture-related infection. We explored how tissue culture sensitivity and specificity varied with the number of tissue specimens obtained; and with the number of specimens from which an identical isolate was required (diagnostic cutoff). To model the effect of the number of specimens taken we randomly sampled Aim
Method
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 sonication fluid culture of explants. These current techniques can have relatively low sensitivity, with prior antimicrobial therapy or infection by fastidious organisms particularly influencing culture results. Metagenomic sequencing has demonstrated potential as a tool for diagnosis of bacterial, viral and parasitic infections directly from clinical samples, without the need for an initial culture step. We assessed whether metagenomic sequencing of DNA extracts from sonication fluid can provide a sensitive tool for diagnosis of PJI compared to sonication fluid culture. We compared metagenomic sequencing with standard aerobic and anaerobic culture in 97 sonication fluid samples from prosthetic joint and other orthopaedic device-related infections. Sonication fluids were filtered to remove whole human cells and tissue debris, then bacterial cells were mechanically lysed before DNA extraction. DNA was sequenced and sequencing reads 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.Aim
Method
Collection of 4–5 independent peri-prosthetic tissue samples is recommended for microbiological diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections. Sonication of explanted prostheses has also been shown to increase microbiological yield in some centres. We compared sonication with standard tissue sampling for diagnosis of prosthetic joint and other orthopaedic device related infections. We used standard protocols for sample collection, tissue culture and sonication. Positive tissue culture was defined as isolation of a phenotypically indistinguishable organism from ≥2 samples; and positive sonication culture as isolation of an organism at ≥50 cfu/ml. We compared the diagnostic performance of each method against an established clinical definition of infection (Trampuz 2011), and against a composite clinical and microbiological definition of infection based on international consensus (Gehrke & Parvizi 2013). 350 specimens were received for sonication, including joint prostheses (160), exchangeable components (76), other orthopaedic hardware and cement (104), and bone (10). A median of 5 peri-prosthetic tissue samples were received from each procedure (IQR 4–5). Tissue culture was more sensitive than sonication for diagnosis of prosthetic joint and orthopaedic device related infection using both the clinical definition (66% versus 57%, McNemar's Χ2 test p=0.016) and the composite definition of infection (87% vs 66%, p<0.001). The combination of tissue culture and sonication provided optimum sensitivity: 73% (95% confidence interval 65–79%) against the clinical definition and 92% (86–96%) against the composite definition. Results were similar when analysis was confined to joint prostheses and exchangeable components; other orthopaedic hardware; and patients who had received antibiotics within 14 days prior to surgery. Tissue sampling appears to have higher sensitivity than sonication for diagnosis of prosthetic joint and orthopaedic device infection at our centre. This may reflect rigorous collection of multiple peri-prosthetic tissue samples. A combination of methods may offer optimal sensitivity, reflecting the anatomical and biological spectrum of prosthetic joint and other device related infections.
