Department of Public Health, Orthopedic Unit, "Federico II" University, Naples, Italy.
Service of Infectious Diseases, Cardarelli Hospital, Naples, Italy.
Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2024 Dec;144(12):5217-5227. doi: 10.1007/s00402-024-05416-0. Epub 2024 Jul 8.
Calprotectin is a protein endowed with antimicrobial properties, rendering it a distinctive marker for infection. Two methods are currently available for the assay of calprotectin: the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and the lateral flow test (LFT). We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of synovial fluid calprotectin and to compare the accuracy of the laboratory-based test and the qualitative assessment for the diagnosis of hip and knee prosthetic infection.
We searched (from inception to November 2023) MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane for studies on calprotectin in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (LR), and diagnostic odds ratio were analyzed. The receiver-operating curve for each method was calculated.
We included 14 articles in our meta-analysis, including 902 patients who underwent total hip and knee arthroplasties revision; 331 (37%) had a joint infection according to MSIS, MSIS-modified criteria, ICM 2018 and EBJIS 2021. Considering the false-positive result rate of 6% and false-negative result rate of 7%, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.92 (95% CI 0.89-0.94) and 0.93 (0.91-0.95), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.93 (95% CI 0.91-0.94). No statistical differences in terms of sensitivity and specificity were found between ELISA and LFT. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the two calprotectin assessment methods were: LFT 0.90 (95% CI 0.869-0.935) and 0.92 (95% CI 0.894-0.941), respectively; ELISA 0.96 (95% CI 0.914-0.986) and 0.97 (95% CI 0.934-0.988), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio of the ELISA was superior to that of the LFT (906.6667, 95% CI 271.2686-3030.3712 versus 113.8886, 95% CI 70.4001-184.2414; p < 0.001). The AUC for ELISA and LFT was 0.968 (95% CI 0.944-0.984) and 0.915 (95% CI 0.895-0.933), respectively.
Detection of synovial calprotectin is an accurate test for diagnosis of hip and knee prosthetic infections. The diagnostic accuracy of the two calprotectin assessment methods is almost comparable. The LFT is a valid, rapid, and more available diagnostic tool, particularly to rule out PJI.
钙卫蛋白是一种具有抗菌特性的蛋白质,使其成为感染的独特标志物。目前有两种方法可用于检测钙卫蛋白:酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)和侧向流动试验(LFT)。我们旨在评估关节液钙卫蛋白的诊断准确性,并比较基于实验室的检测和定性评估对髋关节和膝关节假体感染的诊断准确性。
我们从 MEDLINE、Scopus、EMBASE、Web of Science 和 Cochrane 中检索(从成立到 2023 年 11 月)关于钙卫蛋白在诊断假体周围关节感染(PJI)中的应用的研究。分析了敏感性、特异性、阳性和阴性似然比(LR)以及诊断比值比。计算了每种方法的受试者工作特征曲线。
我们的荟萃分析纳入了 14 篇文章,包括 902 名接受全髋关节和膝关节置换术翻修的患者;根据 MSIS、MSIS 改良标准、ICM 2018 和 EBJIS 2021,331 例(37%)存在关节感染。考虑到假阳性率为 6%和假阴性率为 7%,合并敏感性和特异性分别为 0.92(95%CI 0.89-0.94)和 0.93(0.91-0.95)。曲线下面积(AUC)为 0.93(95%CI 0.91-0.94)。ELISA 和 LFT 的敏感性和特异性之间无统计学差异。两种钙卫蛋白评估方法的合并敏感性和特异性分别为:LFT 0.90(95%CI 0.869-0.935)和 0.92(95%CI 0.894-0.941);ELISA 0.96(95%CI 0.914-0.986)和 0.97(95%CI 0.934-0.988)。ELISA 的诊断比值比优于 LFT(906.6667,95%CI 271.2686-3030.3712 与 113.8886,95%CI 70.4001-184.2414;p<0.001)。ELISA 和 LFT 的 AUC 分别为 0.968(95%CI 0.944-0.984)和 0.915(95%CI 0.895-0.933)。
检测关节液钙卫蛋白是诊断髋关节和膝关节假体感染的一种准确方法。两种钙卫蛋白评估方法的诊断准确性几乎相当。LFT 是一种有效、快速且更易获得的诊断工具,特别是用于排除 PJI。