Suppr超能文献

肩关节手术中的超声骨刀:是否必要?

Sonication in shoulder surgery: is it necessary?

机构信息

Department of Orthopedics, Hospital del Mar, Parc de Salut Mar, Passeig Marítim 25-29, 08003, Barcelona, Spain.

出版信息

Int Orthop. 2020 Sep;44(9):1755-1759. doi: 10.1007/s00264-020-04543-8. Epub 2020 Mar 26.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The objective of the present study was to determine whether sonication yields greater sensitivity when compared with the traditional tissue culture in detecting peri-implant infections in shoulder surgery.

METHODS

It is a retrospective study that includes 99 shoulder surgeries with implants explanted. The inclusion criteria required at least four tissue cultures, sonication of the material explanted, and a minimum follow-up of two years. Patients were classified according to the definition of periprosthetic shoulder infection of the 2018 International Consensus Meeting on Orthopedic Infections. The classifications are definitive infection, probable infection, possible infection, and unlikely infection.

RESULTS

Among the 99 surgical procedures, 31 were considered definitive infections, 11 possible/probable infections, and 57 unlikely infections. Considering the cases with a definitive infection, the sensitivity of the tissue culture was 87.09% and the sensitivity of sonication stood at 80.64% (p = 0.406). Analyzing the cases with a definitive infection and those having a possible/probable infection together and comparing them with those with unlikely infection, the sensitivity of sonication was 80.4% and the sensitivity of the tissue culture came to 91.4%. The specificity of the sonication was 98.1% and the specificity of the tissue culture was 99.6%.

CONCLUSION

The sensitivity of sonication in shoulder surgery (80.64%) is not superior to the sensitivity of the tissue culture (87.09%). Specificity remains high with both methods, being 98.1% in the sonication group and 99.6% in the tissue culture. Sonication brings no benefit to the detection of shoulder per-implant infections.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在确定与传统组织培养相比,超声冲洗在检测肩外科植入物周围感染时是否具有更高的敏感性。

方法

这是一项回顾性研究,共纳入 99 例接受植入物取出的肩部手术。纳入标准要求至少进行 4 次组织培养、对取出的材料进行超声冲洗,并至少随访 2 年。根据 2018 年骨科感染国际共识会议对假体周围肩部感染的定义对患者进行分类。分类为明确感染、可能/疑似感染、可能感染和不太可能感染。

结果

在 99 例手术中,31 例被认为是明确感染,11 例是可能/疑似感染,57 例是不太可能感染。考虑到明确感染的病例,组织培养的敏感性为 87.09%,超声冲洗的敏感性为 80.64%(p=0.406)。分析明确感染病例和可能/疑似感染病例,并将其与不太可能感染病例进行比较,超声冲洗的敏感性为 80.4%,组织培养的敏感性为 91.4%。超声冲洗的特异性为 98.1%,组织培养的特异性为 99.6%。

结论

超声冲洗在肩部手术中的敏感性(80.64%)并不优于组织培养的敏感性(87.09%)。两种方法的特异性均较高,超声冲洗组为 98.1%,组织培养组为 99.6%。超声冲洗对检测肩植入物周围感染没有益处。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验