Klinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Unfallchirurgie, Universitätsklinikum Bonn.
Institut für Medizinische Mikrobiologie, Immunologie und Parasitologie, Universitätsklinikum Bonn.
Z Orthop Unfall. 2021 Aug;159(4):447-453. doi: 10.1055/a-1150-8396. Epub 2020 May 11.
The aim of this study was to evaluate the performance of a commercially available dithiothreitol (DTT) kit for routine use in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) in comparison to conventional microbiological tissue specimens and sonication procedures in a maximal care hospital.
We applied the DTT system in 40 consecutive cases of revision arthroplasty (23 PJIs and 17 aseptic revisions), with an exchange or a removal of components. The hardware components were split between the DTT system and the conventional sonication procedure. At least three tissue biopsies and a joint fluid specimen were sent for microbiological and histopathological analysis. Data was analysed retrospectively to compare between the different methods.
Cultures of the DTT fluid showed a sensitivity of 65% and specificity of 100%, as referenced to conventional microbiological cultures. Sonication had better sensitivity (75%) but lower specificity (85%). The categorical agreement of DTT cultures compared to sonication fluid cultures was 78% (31/40). Neither pathogen type, infection duration nor antibiotic pretreatment influenced the accuracy of the DTT, but a low pH in the DTT seemed to be associated with false-negative results.
DTT was inferior in sensitivity when diagnosing PJIs compared to sonication fluid cultures and tissue biopsies. A low pH in the DTT fluid correlated with false-negative results. Nevertheless, the closed system of the DTT kit avoids contamination and false-positive results, and DTT can be an alternative where sonication is not available.
本研究旨在评估一种市售二硫苏糖醇(DTT)试剂盒在一家重症监护医院中常规用于诊断假体周围关节感染(PJI)的性能,与传统的微生物组织标本和超声处理程序进行比较。
我们在 40 例连续的翻修关节置换病例中应用了 DTT 系统(23 例 PJI 和 17 例无菌性翻修),包括关节置换物的更换或取出。硬件部件在 DTT 系统和传统的超声处理程序之间进行了分配。至少有 3 个组织活检和关节液标本被送去进行微生物和组织病理学分析。数据进行了回顾性分析,以比较不同方法之间的差异。
DTT 液的培养显示出 65%的敏感性和 100%的特异性,与传统的微生物培养相比。超声处理具有更好的敏感性(75%)但特异性较低(85%)。DTT 培养与超声液培养的分类一致性为 78%(31/40)。病原体类型、感染持续时间或抗生素预处理均未影响 DTT 的准确性,但 DTT 中的低 pH 值似乎与假阴性结果有关。
与超声液培养和组织活检相比,DTT 在诊断 PJI 方面的敏感性较低。DTT 液中的低 pH 值与假阴性结果相关。然而,DTT 试剂盒的封闭系统可以避免污染和假阳性结果,并且在无法进行超声处理时,DTT 可以作为替代方法。