Aims

Accurate diagnosis of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) presents a significant challenge for hip surgeons. Preoperative diagnosis is not always easy to establish, making the intraoperative decision-making process crucial in deciding between one- and two-stage revision total hip arthroplasty (THA). Calprotectin is a promising point-of-care novel biomarker that has displayed high accuracy in detecting PJI. We aimed to evaluate the utility of intraoperative calprotectin lateral flow immunoassay (LFI) in THA patients with suspected chronic PJI.

Aims

The purpose of this study was to evaluate unexpected positive cultures in total hip arthroplasty (THA) revisions for presumed aseptic loosening, to assess the prevalence of low-grade infection using two definition criteria, and to analyze its impact on implant survival after revision.

Aims

Calprotectin (CLP) is produced in neutrophils and monocytes and released into body fluids as a result of inflammation or infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate the utility of blood and synovial CLP in the diagnosis of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

Aims

We aimed to report the mid- to long-term rates of septic and aseptic failure after two-stage revision surgery for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total hip arthroplasty (THA).

Aims

The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be difficult. All current diagnostic tests have problems with accuracy and interpretation of results. Many new tests have been proposed, but there is no consensus on the place of many of these in the diagnostic pathway. Previous attempts to develop a definition of PJI have not been universally accepted and there remains no reference standard definition.

Aims

To evaluate the histopathological examination of peri-implant tissue samples as a technique in the diagnosis of postoperative spinal implant infection (PSII).

Aims. 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. Patients and Methods. 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 (. sd. 20.4) and there were 104 female patients. Results. Sonication cultures were positive in 75 cases (45.2%). Hardware failure was the most common indication for revision surgery and revealed a positive sonication culture in 26/75 cases (35%) followed by adjacent segment disease (ASD) in 23/75 cases (30%). Cutibacterium acnes and Staphylococcus epidermidis were the most commonly isolated microorganisms, observed in 45% and 31% of cases, respectively. C. acnes was isolated in 65.2% of cases when the indication for revision surgery was ASD. Conclusion. Infection must always be considered as a possibility in the setting of spinal revision surgery, especially in the case of hardware failure, regardless of the lack of clinical signs. Sonication should be routinely used to isolate microorganisms adherent to implants. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:621–624

Aims

The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains demanding due to limitations of all the available diagnostic tests. The synovial fluid marker, α-defensin, is a promising adjunct for the assessment of potential PJI. The purpose of this study was to investigate the qualitative assessment of α-defensin, using Synovasure to detect or exclude periprosthetic infection in total joint arthroplasty.

We have designed a prospective study to evaluate the usefulness of prolonged incubation of cultures from sonicated orthopaedic implants. During the study period 124 implants from 113 patients were processed (22 osteosynthetic implants, 46 hip prostheses, 54 knee prostheses, and two shoulder prostheses). Of these, 70 patients had clinical infection; 32 had received antibiotics at least seven days before removal of the implant. A total of 54 patients had sonicated samples that produced positive cultures (including four patients without infection). All of them were positive in the first seven days of incubation. No differences were found regarding previous antibiotic treatment when analysing colony counts or days of incubation in the case of a positive result. In our experience, extending incubation of the samples to 14 days does not add more positive results for sonicated orthopaedic implants (hip and knee prosthesis and osteosynthesis implants) compared with a conventional seven-day incubation period.

Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:1001–6.

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% versus 67%, respectively; p < 0.001), in unsuspected septic failure (100% versus 48.5%, respectively; p < 0.001), and in delayed implant failure (88% versus 58%, respectively; p < 0.001). PITC sensitivity dropped significantly in unsuspected compared with suspected septic failure (p = 0.007), and in delayed compared with early failure (p = 0.013). There were no differences in specificity. 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: Bone Joint J 2013;95-B:244–9

Patients with infected arthroplasties are normally treated with a two-stage exchange procedure using polymethylmethacrylate bone cement spacers impregnated with antibiotics. However, spacers may act as a foreign body to which micro-organisms may adhere and grow. In this study it was hypothesised that subclinical infection may be diagnosed with sonication of the surface biofilm of the spacer. The aims were to assess the presence of subclinical infection through sonication of the spacer at the time of a second-stage procedure, and to determine the relationship between subclinical infection and the clinical outcome. Of 55 patients studied, 11 (20%) were diagnosed with subclinical infection. At a mean follow-up of 12 months (interquartile range 6 to 18), clinical failure was found in 18 (32.7%) patients. Of the patients previously diagnosed with subclinical infection, 63% (7 of 11) had failed compared with 25% (11 of 44) of those without subclinical infection (odds ratio 5.25, 95% confidence interval 1.29 to 21.4, p = 0.021). Sonication of the biofilm of the surface of the spacer is useful in order to exclude subclinical infection and therefore contributes to improving the outcome after two-stage procedures