Van Diek Floor M, Albers Christiaan G M, Van Hooff Miranda L, Meis Jacques F, Goosen Jon H M
a Department of Orthopaedic Surgery , Prosthetic Joint Infection Unit , Sint Maartenskliniek.
b Department of Scientific Research , Sint Maartenskliniek.
Acta Orthop. 2017 Jun;88(3):294-299. doi: 10.1080/17453674.2017.1300021. Epub 2017 Mar 13.
Background and purpose - Prosthetic-joint infection (PJI) is the most serious complication of arthroplasty, and accurate identification of a potentially responsible microorganism is essential for successful antibiotic treatment. We therefore determined the diagnostic accuracy of sonication and compared it with tissue culture as a screening tool in detecting prosthetic joint infection in revision arthroplasty. Patients and methods - 252 consecutive revision arthroplasty cases were enrolled. These cases were determined as being suspected or unsuspected of having infection according to standard criteria. Perioperatively, 6 periprosthetic interface tissue biopsies were obtained from each patient and the implants removed were sonicated. The sensitivity and specificity of periprosthetic tissue culture and sonication fluid cultures were determined. Results - Preoperatively, 75 revision cases were classified as having PJI (33 early and 42 late) and 177 were unsuspected of having infection. Compared with tissue culture, the sensitivity of the sonication fluid analysis was low: 0.47 (95% CI: 0.35-0.59) for sonication as compared to 0.68 (95% CI: 0.56-0.78) for tissue culture. The specificity of the sonication fluid analysis was higher than that for tissue culture: 0.99 (95% CI: 0.96-1.0) as compared to 0.80 (95% CI: 0.74-0.86). Interpretation - Sonication is a highly specific test for diagnosis of PJI. However, due to the low sensitivity, a negative sonication result does not rule out the presence of PJI. Thus, sonication is not of value for screening of microorganisms during revision surgery.
背景与目的——人工关节感染(PJI)是关节置换术最严重的并发症,准确识别潜在的致病微生物对于抗生素治疗的成功至关重要。因此,我们确定了超声处理的诊断准确性,并将其与组织培养作为翻修关节置换术中检测人工关节感染的筛查工具进行比较。
患者与方法——纳入252例连续的翻修关节置换术病例。根据标准标准将这些病例确定为怀疑或不怀疑有感染。术中,从每位患者获取6份假体周围界面组织活检样本,并对取出的植入物进行超声处理。确定假体周围组织培养和超声处理液培养的敏感性和特异性。
结果——术前,75例翻修病例被分类为患有PJI(33例早期和42例晚期),177例不怀疑有感染。与组织培养相比,超声处理液分析的敏感性较低:超声处理的敏感性为0.47(95%CI:0.35 - 0.59),而组织培养为0.68(95%CI:0.56 - 0.78)。超声处理液分析的特异性高于组织培养:分别为0.99(95%CI:0.96 - 1.0)和0.80(95%CI:0.74 - 0.86)。
解读——超声处理是诊断PJI的高度特异性检测方法。然而,由于敏感性低,超声处理结果为阴性并不能排除PJI的存在。因此,超声处理在翻修手术中对微生物的筛查没有价值。