To evaluate the histopathological examination of peri-implant tissue samples as a technique in the diagnosis of postoperative spinal implant infection (PSII). This was a retrospective analysis. Patients who underwent revision spinal surgery at our institution were recruited for this study. PSII was diagnosed by clinical signs, histopathology, and microbiological examination of intraoperatively collected samples. Histopathology was defined as the gold standard. The sensitivity for histopathology was calculated. A total of 47 patients with PSII and at least one microbiological and histopathological sample were included in the study.Aims
Methods
During revision procedures for aseptic reasons, there remains a suspicion that failure may have been the result of an undetected subclinical infection. However, there is little evidence available in the literature about unexpected positive results in presumed aseptic revision spine surgery. The aims of our study were to estimate the prevalence of unexpected positive culture using sonication and to evaluate clinical characteristics of these patients. All patients who underwent a revision surgery after instrumented spinal surgery at our institution between July 2014 and August 2016 with spinal implants submitted for sonication were retrospectively analyzed. Only revisions presumed as aseptic are included in the study. During the study period, 204 spinal revisions were performed for diagnoses other than infection. In 38 cases, sonication cultures were not obtained, leaving a study cohort of 166 cases. The mean age of the cohort was 61.5 years (Aims
Patients and Methods
The purpose of this study was to compare the
diagnostic accuracy for the detection of infection between the culture of
fluid obtained by sonication (SFC) and the culture of peri-implant
tissues (PITC) in patients with early and delayed implant failure,
and those with unsuspected and suspected septic failure. It was
hypothesised that SFC increases the diagnostic accuracy for infection
in delayed, but not early, implant failure, and in unsuspected septic
failure. The diagnostic accuracy for infection of all consecutive
implants (hardware or prostheses) that were removed for failure was
compared between SFC and PITC. This prospective study included 317
patients with a mean age of 62.7 years (9 to 97). The sensitivity
for detection of infection using SFC was higher than using PITC
in an overall comparison (89.9% Sonication is mainly recommended when there is implant failure
with no clear signs of infection and in patients with delayed implant
failure. In early failure, SFC is not superior to PITC for the diagnosis
of infection and, therefore, is not recommended as a routine diagnostic
test in these patients. Cite this article:
