The Alpha-Defensin Test for Diagnosing Periprosthetic Joint Infection in the Setting of an Adverse Local Tissue Reaction Secondary to a Failed Metal-on-Metal Bearing or Corrosion at the Head-Neck Junction

Diagnostics in Late Periprosthetic Infections-Challenges and Solutions

The rising number of arthroplasties is combined with a rising number of periprosthetic joint infections, which leads to life-concerning consequences for the patients, including extended antibiotic treatment, further surgery and increased mortality. The heterogeneity of the symptoms and inflammatory response of the patients due to, e.g., age and comorbidities and the absence of a single diagnostic test with 100% accuracy make it very challenging to choose the right parameters to confirm or deny a periprosthetic joint infection and to establish a standardized definition. In recent years, additional diagnostic possibilities have emerged primarily through the increasing availability of new diagnostic methods, such as genetic techniques. The aim of the review is to provide an overview of the current state of knowledge about the various tests, including the latest developments. The combination of different tests increases the accuracy of the diagnosis. Each physician or clinical department must select the tests from the available methods that can be best implemented for them in organizational and technical terms. Serological parameters and the cultivation of the samples from aspiration or biopsy should be combined with additional synovial tests to create an accurate figure for the failure of the prosthesis, while imaging procedures are used to obtain additional information for the planned therapeutic procedure.

Refining the Role of Routine Synovial Alpha-Defensin in Periprosthetic Joint Infection Following Total Knee Arthroplasty: An Analysis of Limitations

BACKGROUND

The utility of the synovial alpha-defensin test in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) remains controversial. This study aimed to examine the diagnostic utility of this test.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted to identify adults evaluated for PJI following total knee arthroplasty at a single institution. Patient demographics, laboratory results, and operative details were recorded. Using the 2018 Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria, cases were categorized as definitive, inconclusive, or negative for PJI. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of each MSIS criterion was determined. The number of patients whose PJI diagnosis was contingent on alpha-defensin positivity was calculated.

RESULTS

Overall, 172 total knee arthroplasty patients were included, who had an average age of 70.4 years (range, 39 to 95). Of the 21 patients who met major criteria, 20 (95.2%) were alpha-defensin positive. Of the remaining 151 patients, 85 did not meet minor criteria, all of whom were alpha-defensin negative. Among the 30 patients who met minor criteria, 28 (93.3%) were alpha-defensin positive and 2 (6.7%) were negative. The remaining 36 patients were deemed inconclusive preoperatively. In total, alpha-defensin testing changed the diagnosis in only 9 of 172 patients (5.2%). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of alpha-defensin in this cohort were 94.1, 100, 100, and 97.6, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Alpha-defensin may assist in the diagnosis of PJI when a preoperative workup is inconclusive. However, this test is often unnecessary when the diagnosis of PJI can be made using the 2018 MSIS criteria.

Adverse Local Tissue Reaction Secondary to Corrosion at Multiple Junctions in a Modular, Segmental, Distal Femoral Replacement

While adverse local tissue reactions are well described in the total hip arthroplasty literature, there have only been case reports and case series in the total knee arthroplasty literature. There have been no cases described in the setting of a distal femoral replacement. In this case, we describe a 69-year-old female with a complex history of left knee revision arthroplasty with a distal femoral and proximal tibial replacement who presented with left knee pain and was found to have extensive adverse local tissue reaction with corrosion at the femoral stem-extension piece junction and the extension piece-distal femoral component junction. The femoral taper was then manually cleaned and modular components replaced. Corrosion at the stem-distal femoral component junction can result in adverse local tissue reaction in patients with distal femoral replacements. It is important to consider this diagnosis when evaluating patients with knee pain following distal femoral replacement.

Synovial Fluid Biomarkers for the Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Their Diagnostic Accuracy According to Different Definitions

BACKGROUND

Different synovial fluid biomarkers have emerged to improve periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis. The goals of this paper were (i) to assess their diagnostic accuracy and (ii) to evaluate their performance according to different PJI definitions.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was performed using studies that reported diagnostic accuracy of synovial fluid biomarkers using validated PJI definitions published from 2010 to March 2022. A database search was performed through PubMed, Ovid MEDLINE, Central, and Embase. The search identified 43 different biomarkers with four being the more commonly studied, with 75 papers overall: alpha-defensin; leukocyte esterase; synovial fluid C-reactive protein; and calprotectin.

RESULTS

Overall accuracy was higher for calprotectin, followed by alpha-defensin, leukocyte esterase, and synovial fluid C-reactive protein with sensitivities of 78 to 92% and specificities of 90 to 95%. Their diagnostic performance was different according to which definition was adopted as the reference. Specificity was consistently high across definitions for all four biomarkers. Sensitivity varied the most with lower values for the more sensitive European Bone and Joint Infection Society or Infectious Diseases Society of America definitions with higher values for the Musculoskeletal Infection Society definition. The International Consensus Meeting 2018 definition showed intermediate values.

CONCLUSION

All evaluated biomarkers had good specificity and sensitivity, making their use acceptable in the diagnosis of PJI. Biomarkers perform differently according to the selected PJI definitions.

Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Current Clinical Challenges

Over the last several decades, periprosthetic joint infection has been increasing in incidence and is occurring in more complex patients. While there have been advances in both surgical and medical treatment strategies, there remain important gaps in our understanding. Here, we share our current approaches to the diagnosis and management of periprosthetic joint infection, focusing on frequent clinical challenges and collaborative interdisciplinary care.

Joint aspiration for diagnosis of chronic periprosthetic joint infection: when, how, and what tests?

Diagnosing chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) requires clinical suspicion in combination with both serological and synovial fluid tests, the results of which are generally applied to validated scoring systems or consensus definitions for PJI. As no single "gold standard" test exists, the diagnosis becomes challenging, especially in the setting of negative cultures or equivocal test results. This review aims to address the workup of chronic PJI and considerations for clinical evaluation to guide treatment. Following aspiration of the joint in question, a multitude of tests has been developed in an attempt to assist with diagnosis, including cell synovial white blood cell count, gram stain, cultures, leukocyte esterase, alpha-defensin, synovial C-reactive protein, multiplex polymerase chain reaction, next-generation sequencing, and interleukins. Each test has advantages and disadvantages and should be used in conjunction with the overall clinical picture to guide further clinical evaluation and treatment in this complex patient population.

Profiling the Immune Response to Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Non-Infectious Arthroplasty Failure

Arthroplasty failure is a major complication of joint replacement surgery. It can be caused by periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) or non-infectious etiologies, and often requires surgical intervention and (in select scenarios) resection and reimplantation of implanted devices. Fast and accurate diagnosis of PJI and non-infectious arthroplasty failure (NIAF) is critical to direct medical and surgical treatment; differentiation of PJI from NIAF may, however, be unclear in some cases. Traditional culture, nucleic acid amplification tests, metagenomic, and metatranscriptomic techniques for microbial detection have had success in differentiating the two entities, although microbiologically negative apparent PJI remains a challenge. Single host biomarkers or, alternatively, more advanced immune response profiling-based approaches may be applied to differentiate PJI from NIAF, overcoming limitations of microbial-based detection methods and possibly, especially with newer approaches, augmenting them. In this review, current approaches to arthroplasty failure diagnosis are briefly overviewed, followed by a review of host-based approaches for differentiation of PJI from NIAF, including exciting futuristic combinational multi-omics methodologies that may both detect pathogens and assess biological responses, illuminating causes of arthroplasty failure.

Long Pentraxin 3 as a New Biomarker for Diagnosis of Hip and Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infections

BACKGROUND

Preoperative diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) poses an unmet clinical challenge. The long pentraxin PTX3 is a component of the innate immune system involved in infection immunity. This study evaluated the potential of synovial and plasmatic PTX3 in the diagnosis of hip and knee PJIs.

METHODS

Consecutive total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA) revisions were prospectively included and classified as septic or aseptic according to the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) and Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. The concentration of PTX3 in plasma and synovial fluid samples was measured with ELISA. The AUC, threshold value, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were calculated using the ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curve method.

RESULTS

The study population included 128 patients (94 THAs; 34 TKAs). The AUC of the synovial PTX3 based on EBJIS criteria was 0.85 (p < 0.0001), with a sensitivity of 81.13% and a specificity of 93.33%. The AUC based on MSIS criteria was 0.95 (p < 0.001), with a sensitivity of 91.43% and a specificity of 89.25%. Plasmatic PTX3 failed to discriminate infected from non-infected patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Synovial PTX3 demonstrated an excellent diagnostic potential in hip and knee PJIs, with a very high specificity irrespective of the diagnostic criteria for PJI.

Team Approach: Metal Hypersensitivity in Total Joint Arthroplasty

»

As total joint arthroplasty volume continues to grow nationwide, more uncommon complications such as metal implant hypersensitivity are reported with greater frequency in the literature.

»

Metal hypersensitivity is a challenging diagnosis given the potentially vague symptomology. It should be considered a diagnosis of exclusion, necessitating careful consideration of other potential etiologies of a failing implant before arriving at the final diagnosis of metal hypersensitivity.

»

Patients can experience substantial morbidity from implant rejection and in severe, refractory cases may even require revision arthroplasty and conversion to a hypoallergenic implant.

»

Given the complex nature of the condition, successful treatment of metal hypersensitivity to orthopaedic implants is best achieved through the use of a multidisciplinary, team-based approach. Immunologists, radiologists, and infectious disease physicians as well as orthopaedic surgeons and mechanical engineers are all vital in appropriate diagnosis and treatment of the condition.

Are Accuracy Studies for Periprosthetic Joint Infection Diagnosis Inherently Flawed? And What to Do with Schrödinger's Hips? A Prospective Analysis of the Alpha Defensin Lateral-Flow Test in Chronic Painful Hip Arthroplasties

Purpose

The most recent diagnostic criteria for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) include the use of the alpha-defensin (AD) lateral-flow (LF) test, but hip and knee arthroplasties were usually combined in previous studies. This prospective study was designed to examine the accuracy of the AD-LF test for diagnosis of PJI in chronic painful total hip arthroplasties (THA).

Materials and Methods

Patients with chronic painful hip arthroplasties were prospectively enrolled between March 2018 and May 2020. Exclusion criteria included acute PJI or an insufficient amount of synovial fluid. The modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria were primarily used for PJI diagnosis. Fifty-seven patients were included in the analysis group. Revision surgery was not performed in 38 patients, for different reasons (clinical group); these patients remain "Schrödinger's hips": in such cases PJI cannot be excluded nor confirmed until you "open the box".

Results

The result of the AD-LF test was positive in nine patients and negative in 48 patients. Six patients were diagnosed with PJI. AD-LF sensitivity (MSIS criteria) was 83% (95% confidence interval [CI] 36-100%) and specificity was 92% (95% CI 81-98%). The positive and negative predictive value were 56% and 98%, respectively.

Conclusion

The AD test is useful in addition to the existing arsenal of diagnostic tools, and can be helpful in the decision-making process. Not all patients with chronical painful THA will undergo revision surgery. Consequently, in order to determine the reliable diagnostic accuracy of this test, future PJI diagnostic studies should include a second arm of "Schrödinger's hips".

Atypical Presentation of Periprosthetic Joint Infection With Pseudotumor With a Modular-Neck Stem Implant

A 64-year-old male with a recalled modular-neck stem implant presented with a soft tissue mass in the lateral thigh. Preoperative testing revealed no signs of infection by the 2018 periprosthetic joint infection criteria. MRI revealed a large soft tissue mass around the implant consistent with a pseudotumor, and we performed revision surgery of the femoral component for trunnionosis. One intraoperative culture was positive for infection, and the patient was placed on antibiotics. Six weeks following revision surgery of the femoral component, the patient presented with acute drainage and was diagnosed with an acute on chronic periprosthetic joint infection and underwent explantation of the femoral and acetabular components with the placement of an antibiotic spacer. Cultures revealed identical bacteria from the index procedure. Given the clinical course, this case likely represents adverse local tissue reaction with an atypical presentation of periprosthetic joint infection. This is the first case presentation of an adverse local tissue reaction and superimposed periprosthetic joint infection with normal infection workup, representing an important consideration when differentiating between pseudotumor and periprosthetic joint infection in modular-neck femoral stem implants.

Metal Articulations as a Source of Total Hip Arthroplasty Pain

The consensus systematic risk stratification algorithm from the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, and The Hip Society summarizes clinical challenges in evaluation and treatment of metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty (THA) patients with adverse local tissue reaction (ALTR) due to mechanically assisted crevice corrosion (MACC), reviews up-to-date evidence, and identifies the areas for future research in order to provide a useful resource for orthopedic surgeons providing care to these patients. A painful THA has various intrinsic and extrinsic causes. ALTR is one of the intrinsic causes in patients with painful THA. The occurrence of ALTR due to MACC at modular junctions is likely to be multifactorial, including implant, surgical, and patient factors. Therefore, a systematic evaluation needs to involve a focused clinical history, detailed physical examination, laboratory tests, and imaging in order to identify potential differential diagnoses. There should be a low threshold to perform a systematic evaluation of patients with painful non-metal-on-metal THA, including patients with metal-on-polyethylene THA, and modular dual-mobility THA with the CoCr metal acetabular insert, as early recognition and diagnosis of ALTR due to MACC will facilitate initiation of appropriate treatment prior to significant adverse biological reactions. Specialized tests such as blood metal analysis and metal artifact reduction sequence magnetic resonance imaging are important modalities in evaluation and management of ALTR in patients with painful THA.

Synovial fluid α defensin has comparable accuracy to synovial fluid white blood cell count and polymorphonuclear percentage for periprosthetic joint infection diagnosis

AIMS

The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic accuracy of α defensin (AD) lateral flow assay (LFA) and enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) tests for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in comparison to conventional synovial white blood cell (WBC) count and polymorphonuclear neutrophil percentage (PMN%) analysis.

METHODS

Patients undergoing joint aspiration for evaluation of pain after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA) were considered for inclusion. Synovial fluids from 99 patients (25 THA and 74 TKA) were analyzed by WBC count and PMN% analysis, AD LFA, and AD ELISA. WBC and PMN% cutoffs of ≥ 1,700 cells/mm³ and ≥ 65% for TKA and ≥ 3,000 cells/mm³ and ≥ 80% for THA were used, respectively. A panel of three physicians, all with expertise in orthopaedic infections and who were blinded to the results of AD tests, independently reviewed patient data to diagnose subjects as with or without PJI. Consensus PJI classification was used as the reference standard to evaluate test performances. Results were compared using McNemar's test and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) analysis.

RESULTS

Expert consensus classified 18 arthroplasies as having failed due to PJI and 81 due to aseptic failure. Using these classifications, the calculated sensitivity and specificity of AD LFA was 83.3% (95% confidence interval (CI) 58.6 to 96.4) and 93.8% (95% CI 86.2 to 98.0), respectively. Sensitivity and specificity of AD ELISA was 83.3% (95% CI 58.6 to 96.4) and 96.3% (95% CI 89.6 to 99.2), respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between sensitivity (p = 1.000) or specificity (p = 0.157) of the two AD assays. AUC for AD LFA was 0.891. In comparison, AUC for synovial WBC count, PMN%, and the combination of the two values was 0.821 (sensitivity p = 1.000, specificity p < 0.001), 0.886 (sensitivity p = 0.317, specificity p = 0.011), and 0.926 (sensitivity p = 0.317, specificity p = 0.317), respectively.

CONCLUSION

The diagnostic accuracy of synovial AD for PJI diagnosis is comparable and not statistically superior to that of synovial WBC count plus PMN% combined. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2021;103-B(6):1119-1126.

Alpha-Defensin Is Not Superior to Traditional Diagnostic Methods for Detection of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Total Hip Arthroplasty and Total Knee Arthroplasty Patients

BACKGROUND

Synovial fluid alpha-defensin (AD) may improve diagnostic accuracy of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total knee (TKA) and hip (THA) arthroplasty but is only available as send-out test. This study evaluated laboratory result accuracy between send-out test vs hospital labs and if AD made a difference in treatment plan.

METHODS

A retrospective review was performed of 152 consecutive patients with a TKA or THA joint aspiration for painful or clinically concerning joint. Synovial fluid was sent to our institution (hospital-based labs, HBL) and send-out immunoassay laboratory (Synovasure). Patients were scored with specific criteria from validated scoring system for PJI using HBL and Synovasure results. The score with and without AD test was compared to determine if AD impacted patient management.

RESULTS

Overall, there was strong agreement between institutions for PJI diagnosis (Cohen's kappa score 0.96). Twenty-nine patients had PJI diagnosis (score ≥6), of which 28 (97%) had positive AD with 1 false-negative result. Sixty-three patients had inconclusive score (between 2 and 5) and 60 patients had negative PJI diagnosis (score ≤1). Of these patients, 5 underwent surgery for infection. Two patients had surgery for positive AD, 2 for positive culture, and 1 because of elevated HBL results. The AD test changed the PJI diagnosis and influenced decision for surgery in only 1.3% (2/152) of patients.

CONCLUSION

Minimal differences were found in laboratory values between institutions. The addition of AD may be useful in cases of equivocal laboratory results but does not appear to be necessary for routine diagnosis of PJI after TKA/THA.

LEVEL EVIDENCE

Level III.

Risk Stratification Algorithm for Management of Head-Neck Taper Tribocorrosion in Patients with Metal-on-Polyethylene Total Hip Arthroplasty: Consensus Statement of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, and The Hip Society

Adverse local tissue reactions (ALTRs) were initially reported as complications associated with metal-on-metal (MoM) bearings; however, there is increasing concern regarding the occurrence of adverse local tissue reactions from mechanically assisted crevice corrosion (MACC) at the femoral head-neck junction or between other modular junctions of the implant containing cobalt chromium parts in patients with metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) bearings. ALTR due to MACC at the head-neck junction has primarily been reported in association with cobalt chromium alloy femoral heads. As pain following total hip arthroplasty may have various intrinsic and extrinsic causes, a systematic approach to evaluation (risk stratification algorithm) based on the currently available data is recommended to optimize patient management. Evaluation should begin by ruling out common causes of pain, including component loosening and periprosthetic joint infection. While specialized tests such as blood metal analysis and metal artifact reduction sequence magnetic resonance imaging (MARS MRI) are useful modalities in evaluating for ALTRs, over-reliance on any single investigative tool in the clinical decision-making process should be avoided. There should be a low threshold to perform a systematic evaluation for ALTR due to MACC in patients with metal-on-polyethylene total hip arthroplasty as early recognition and diagnosis is critical, as delays in appropriate treatment initiation may result in soft-tissue damage, which complicates surgical treatment and is associated with a higher risk of complications and poorer patient outcomes.

Sensitivity and Specificity of Serum and Synovial Fluid Markers in Diagnosis of Infection in Head-Neck Taper Corrosion of Metal-On-Polyethylene Total Hip Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The accurate diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) in the setting of adverse local tissue reactions in patients with metal-on-polyethylene (MoP) total hip arthroplasty (THA) secondary to head-neck taper junction corrosion is challenging as it frequently has the appearance of purulence. The aim of this study is to evaluate the utility of erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR), C-reactive protein (CRP), and synovial fluid markers in diagnosing PJI in failed MoP THA due to head-neck taper corrosion.

METHODS

A total of 89 consecutive patients with MoP THA with head-neck taper corrosion in 2 groups was evaluated: (1) infection group (n = 11) and (2) noninfection group (n = 78). All patients had highly crossed polyethylene with cobalt chromium femoral heads and had preoperative synovial fluid aspiration. In addition, serum cobalt and chromium levels were analyzed.

RESULTS

The optimal cutoff value for synovial white blood cell was 2144 with 93% sensitivity and 84% specificity. Neutrophil count optimal cutoff value was 82% with 93% sensitivity and 82% specificity. Receiver operating characteristic analysis of ESR and CRP determined optimal cutoff at 57 mm/h and 35 mg/L with 57% sensitivity and 94% specificity and 93% sensitivity and 76% specificity, respectively. There were no significant differences in metal ion levels between the infected and noninfected groups.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that ESR and CRP are useful in excluding PJI, whereas both synovial white blood cell count and neutrophil percentage in hip aspirate are useful markers for diagnosing infection in MoP THA patients with head-neck taper corrosion associated adverse local tissue reaction.

Assessing an alpha-defensin lateral flow device for diagnosing septic arthritis: reporting on a false-negative case and a false-positive case

Alpha-defensin (αD), an antimicrobial peptide released by neutrophils in response to bacterial pathogens, was proposed as a novel diagnostic biomarker in synovial fluid. Several reports have shown that αD can serve as a reliable biomarker in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). We assessed whether αD could also serve to diagnosis of septic arthritis, a similarly difficult to diagnose PJI. To our knowledge, besides PJI, few reports exist assessing the utility of αD for septic arthritis. We have attempted to diagnose several cases of suspected septic arthritis using the Synovasure^® αD detection lateral flow device. We report a false-positive case and a false-negative case. The false-negative case we experienced was caused by Staphylococcus capitis, which is coagulase-negative, and possibly represents a low virulence micro-organism infection. The false-positive case was ultimately diagnosed as seronegative rheumatoid arthritis and possessed calcium pyrophosphate depositions. False positives have been suggested to occur in conditions where neutrophils are mobilised. As for PJI, in cases where diagnosis is difficult, αD can be an additional diagnostic indicator. However, making a definitive diagnosis using the αD lateral flow device alone was found to be difficult. The utility of αD in assessing septic arthritis is inconclusive; therefore, larger prospective clinical studies should be considered for a better assessment.

Current Clinical Methods for Detection of Peri-Prosthetic Joint Infection

Background: Currently, one of the most pressing problems in the field of orthopedic surgery is peri-prosthetic joint infection [PJI]. While there are numerous ways to detect PJI, current clinical detection methods differ across institutions and have varying criteria and protocols. Some of these methods include the Modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society system, culturing, polymerase chain reaction, the determination of the presence of certain biomarkers, testing for the presence of alpha defensin peptides, and leukocyte level testing. Methods: This review summarizes the most recent publications in the field of PJI detection to highlight current strengths as well as provide future directions to find the system for the quickest, cost-effective, and most accurate way to diagnose these types of infections. Results: The results of this literature review suggest that, while each method of diagnosis has its advantages, each has various drawbacks as well. Current methods can be expensive, take days to weeks to complete, be prone to contamination, and can produce ambiguous results. Conclusions: The findings in this review emphasize the need for a more comprehensive and accurate system for diagnosing PJI. In addition, the specific comparison of advantages and drawbacks can be useful for researchers and clinicians with goals of creating new diagnostic tests for PJIs, as well as in clinical scenarios to determine the correct treatment for patients.

A profile on the Synovasure alpha defensin test for the detection of periprosthetic infections

INTRODUCTION

Clinicians have waited a long time for a 'universal' marker that may help them distinguish infected from non-infected total joint arthroplasties when doubts persist after using classical clinical and biological signs of infection. In recent years, synovial fluid biomarkers including leukocyte esterase, alpha-defensins, and CRP have shown promising results for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs).

AREAS COVERED

This review provides an overview of the rational and the use of the Synovasure® alpha-defensin tests in patients with a suspicion of PJI. Using a systematic investigation by keywords, we looked for all citations (and the citations to these citations) of the selected papers.

EXPERT OPINION

The Synovasure® alpha-defensin tests demonstrate high potential for the diagnosis of PJIs. However, the data currently available also show that the universal marker of infection in the settings of PJIs is still to be discovered.

Does the Alpha Defensin ELISA Test Perform Better Than the Alpha Defensin Lateral Flow Test for PJI Diagnosis? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Prospective Studies

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) following total joint arthroplasty is a serious complication that causes severe morbidity and adds a major financial burden to the healthcare system. Although there is plenty of research on the alpha-defensin (AD) test, a meta-analysis consisting of only prospective studies investigating AD's diagnostic efficacy has not been performed. Additionally, some important subgroups such as THA and TKA have not been separately analyzed, particularly regarding two commonly used versions of the AD test, the laboratory-based (ELISA) and lateral-flow (LF).

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

(1) Does the AD ELISA test perform better in the detection of PJI than the AD LF test, in terms of pooled sensitivity and specificity, when including prospective studies only? (2) Are there differences in sensitivity or specificity when using AD ELISA and AD LF tests for PJI diagnosis of THA or TKA PJI separately?

METHODS

Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, we included prospective studies describing the use of either AD test in the workup of pain after total joint arthroplasty (primary or revision, but not after resection arthroplasty). Fifteen studies (AD ELISA: 4; AD LF: 11) were included, with 1592 procedures. Subgroup data on THA and TKA could be retrieved for 1163 procedures (ELISA THA: 123; LF THA: 257; ELISA TKA: 228; LF TKA: 555). Studies not describing THA or TKA, those not using Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria as the standard for determining the presence or absence of PJI, those not clearly reporting data for the AD test for the total cohort, and those describing data published in another study were excluded. Studies were not excluded based on follow-up duration; the MSIS criteria could be used within a few weeks, when test results were available. Quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 criteria. Study quality was generally good. The most frequent sources of bias were related to patient selection (such as unclear inclusion and exclusion criteria) and flow and timing (uncertainty in place and time of aspiration, for example). Heterogeneity was moderate to high; a bivariate random-effects model therefore was used. To answer both research questions, sensitivity and specificity were calculated for AD ELISA and LF test groups and THA and TKA subgroups, and were compared using z-test statistics and meta-regression analysis.

RESULTS

No differences were found between the AD ELISA and the AD LF for PJI diagnosis in the pooled cohorts (THA and TKA combined), in terms of sensitivity (90% versus 86%; p = 0.43) and specificity (97% versus 96%; p = 0.39). Differences in sensitivity for PJI diagnosis were found between the THA and TKA groups for the AD ELISA test (70% versus 94%; p = 0.008); pooled AD LF test sensitivity did not differ between THA and TKA (80% versus 87%; p = 0.20). No differences in specificity were found in either subgroup.

CONCLUSIONS

Both the AD ELISA and AD LF test can be used in clinical practice because both have high sensitivity and very high specificity for PJI diagnosis. The lower sensitivity found for diagnosis of PJI in THA for the AD ELISA test must be carefully interpreted because the pooled data were heterogenous and only two studies for this group were included. Future research should analyze TKAs and THAs separately to confirm or disprove this finding.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II diagnostic study.

Assessment of a Multiplex Serological Test for the Diagnosis of Prosthetic Joint Infection: a Prospective Multicentre Study

Introduction: The diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) can be difficult in the chronic stage and is based on clinical and paraclinical evidence. A minimally invasive serological test against the main pathogens encountered during PJI would distinguish PJI from mechanical loosening. Methods: We performed a prospective, multicentre, cross-sectional study to assess the contribution of serology in the diagnosis of PJI. Over a 2-year period, all patients undergoing prosthesis revision were included in the study. A C-reactive protein assay and a serological test specifically designed against 5 bacterial species (Staphylococcus aureus, S. epidermidis, S. lugdunensis, Streptococcus agalactiae, Cutibacterium acnes) were performed preoperatively. Five samples per patient were taken intraoperatively during surgery. The diagnosis of PJI was based on clinical and bacteriological criteria according to guidelines. Results: Between November 2015 and November 2017, 115 patients were included, 49 for a chronic PJI and 66 for a mechanical problem. Among patients with PJI, a sinus tract was observed in 32.6% and a C-reactive protein level ≥10 mg/L in 74.5%. The PJI was monomicrobial in 43 cases (targeted staphylococci, 24; S. agalactiae, 1; C. acnes, 2; others, 16), and polymicrobial in 6 cases (12.2%). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 75.0%, 82.1%, 58.3% and 90.8%, respectively, for targeted staphylococci. Specificity/negative predictive value was 97.3%/100% for S. agalactiae and 83.8% /96.9% for C. acnes. Conclusions: The serological tests are insufficient to affirm the diagnosis of PJI for the targeted bacteria. Nevertheless, the excellent NPV may help clinicians to exclude PJI.

Laboratory-based versus qualitative assessment of α-defensin in periprosthetic hip and knee infections: a systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Two methods are currently available for the assay of α-defensin: the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) and the lateral flow test. We aimed to assess the diagnostic accuracy of synovial fluid α-defensin and to compare the accuracy of the laboratory-based test and the qualitative assessment for the diagnosis of hip and knee prosthetic infection.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched (from inception to May 2018) MEDLINE, Scopus, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane for studies on α-defensin in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratio (LR), and diagnostic odds ratio were analyzed using the bivariate diagnostic random-effects model. The receiver-operating curve for each method was calculated.

RESULTS

We included 13 articles in our meta-analysis, including 1170 patients who underwent total hip and knee arthroplasties revision; 368 (31%) had a joint infection according to MSIS and MSIS-modified criteria. Considering the false-positive result rate of 8% and false-negative result rate of 3%, pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.90 (95% CI 0.83-0.94) and 0.95 (0.92-0.96), respectively. The area under the curve (AUC) was 0.94 (0.92-0.94). No statistical differences in terms of sensitivity and specificity were found between the laboratory-based and qualitative test. The pooled sensitivity and specificity of the two alpha-defensin assessment methods were: laboratory-based test 0.97 (95% CI 0.93-0.99) and 0.96 (95% CI 0.94-0.98), respectively; qualitative test 0.83 (95% CI 0.73-0.91) and 0.94 (95% CI 0.89-0.97), respectively. The diagnostic odds ratio of the α-defensin laboratory based was superior to that of the qualitative test (1126.085, 95% CI 352.172-3600.702 versus 100.9, 95% CI 30.1-338.41; p < 0.001). The AUC for immunoassay and qualitative tests was 0.97 (0.95-0.99) and 0.91 (0.88-0.99), respectively.

CONCLUSION

Detection of α-defensin is an accurate test for diagnosis of hip and knee prosthetic infections. The diagnostic accuracy of the two alpha-defensin assessment methods is comparable. The lateral flow assay is a valid, rapid, and more available diagnostic tool, particularly to rule out PJI.

Good accuracy of the alpha-defensin lateral flow test for hip periprosthetic joint infection: A pilot study in a retrospective cohort of 52 patients

BACKGROUND

The alpha-defensin lateral flow (ADLF) test is a new diagnostic tool for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Test accuracy for combined cohorts of hip and knee PJI has been reported to be good.

AIM

To assess the accuracy of the ADLF test for hip PJI, and to compare three different diagnostic criteria for PJI.

METHODS

A cohort of 52 patients was identified, with a painful or poorly functioning total hip- or hemi-arthroplasty, that underwent aspiration and a subsequent ADLF test. PJI was diagnosed with Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria, and sensitivity, specificity, overall accuracy, positive predictive value and negative predictive value were calculated. Furthermore, test specifics were compared with the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) and 2018 International Consensus Meeting (ICM) criteria for PJI.

RESULTS

Using MSIS criteria, sensitivity was 100% (CI: 54%-100%) and specificity was 89% (CI: 76%-96%). Six true positives and 5 false positives were found, including one case of metallosis. Using EBJIS criteria, more PJIs were found (11 vs 6), sensitivity was lower (71%, CI: 42%-92%) and specificity was higher (97%, CI: 86%-100%), with 4 false negatives and one false positive result. Using 2018 ICM criteria, sensitivity was 91% (62%-100%) and specificity 100% (91%-100%). The results in this cohort are comparable to previous studies.

CONCLUSION

Overall test accuracy of the ADLF test was good in this cohort, with a sensitivity of 100% and specificity of 89%. Using different PJI definition criteria, sensitivity and specificity changed slightly but overall accuracy remained around 90%. Using the ADLF test in metallosis cases can result in false positive results and should be performed with caution.

Synovial fluid α-defensin in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection: the lateral flow test is an effective intraoperative detection method

Background

Synovial fluid α-defensin is a valuable biomarker for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Its diagnostic value for PJI has been widely evaluated recently, but results are inconsistent, especially for different test methods. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of laboratory-based immunoassay and lateral flow testing for the detection of α-defensin against hip and knee PJI.

Methods

We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for articles on the diagnostic accuracy of α-defensin for PJI published up to September 2018. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated for the evaluation of the diagnostic value of α-defensin for PJI.

Results

Nineteen studies were included. Eleven evaluated laboratory-based immunoassay, and 10 evaluated the lateral flow test results. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, AUC, PLR, NLR, and DOR of laboratory-based immunoassays were 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90–0.98), 0.97 (95% CI 0.95–0.99), 0.99 (95% CI 0.98–1.00), 35.0 (95% CI 18.5–66.2), 0.04 (95% CI 0.02–0.11), and 811 (95% CI 220–2990), respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, AUC, PLR, NLR, and DOR of the lateral flow test were 0.86 (95% CI 0.81–0.91), 0.96 (95% CI 0.93–0.98), 0.95 (95% CI 0.93–0.97), 21.2 (95% CI 11.7–38.5), 0.14 (95% CI 0.10–0.21), and 148 (95% CI 64–343), respectively.

Conclusions

Laboratory-based immunoassay of α-defensin is highly accurate for the diagnosis of hip and knee PJI. The lateral flow test is less sensitive but still a useful intraoperative detection tool for PJI.

Diagnostic accuracy of alpha-defensin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay in the clinical evaluation of painful hip and knee arthroplasty with possible prosthetic joint infection

Aims

The aim of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of the synovial alpha-defensin enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in the work-up prior to revision of total hip (THA) and knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Patients and Methods

Inclusion criteria for this prospective cohort study were acute or chronic symptoms of the index joint without specific exclusion criteria. Synovial fluid aspirates of 202 patients were analyzed and semiquantitative laboratory alpha-defensin ELISA was performed. Final diagnosis of PJI was established by examination of samples obtained during revision surgery.

Results

Sensitivity and specificity of the alpha-defensin ELISA for PJI were 78.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) 66.7 to 88.5) and 96.6% (95% CI 93.0 to 99.3). Positive and negative predictive values were 89.6% (95% CI 80.6 to 97.8) and 92.2% (95% CI 87.5 to 96.1). The test remained false-negative in 22% of septic revisions, most of which were due to coagulase-negative staphylococci all occurring in either late-chronic or early-postoperative PJI.

Conclusion

The routine use of synovial fluid alpha-defensin laboratory ELISA in the preoperative evaluation of symptomatic THAs and TKAs is insufficient to accurately diagnose PJI. Particularly in cases involving low-virulence organisms, such as coagulase-negative staphylococci, there remains a need for tests with a higher sensitivity. Cite this article: Bone Joint J 2019;101-B:970–977.

Next-Generation Sequencing vs Culture-Based Methods for Diagnosing Periprosthetic Joint Infection After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

BACKGROUND

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) after total knee arthroplasty is challenging to diagnose. Compared with culture-based techniques, next-generation sequencing (NGS) is more sensitive for identifying organisms but is also less specific and more expensive. To date, there has been no study comparing the cost-effectiveness of these two methods to diagnose PJI after total knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

A Markov, state-transition model projecting lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was constructed to determine the cost-effectiveness from a societal perspective. The primary outcome was incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, with a willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000/QALY. Sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate parameter assumptions.

RESULTS

At our base case values, culture was not determined to be cost-effective compared to NGS, with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $422,784 per QALY. One-way sensitivity analyses found NGS to be the cost-effective choice above a pretest probability of 45.5% for PJI. In addition, NGS was cost-effective if its sensitivity was greater than 70.0% and its specificity greater than 94.1%. Two-way sensitivity analyses revealed that the pretest probability and test performance parameters (sensitivity and specificity) were the largest factors for identifying whether a particular strategy was cost-effective.

CONCLUSION

The results of our model suggest that the cost-effectiveness of NGS to diagnose PJI depends primarily on the pretest probability of PJI and the performance characteristics of the NGS technology. Our results are consistent with the idea that NGS should be reserved for clinical contexts with a high pretest probability of PJI. Further study is required to determine the indications and subgroups for which NGS offers clinical benefit.

What Is the Role of Repeat Aspiration in the Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Hip Infection?

BACKGROUND

The American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons clinical practice guideline currently recommends repeat joint aspiration when workup of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) reveals conflicting data. This guideline is based on a single study of 31 patients published 25 years ago. We sought to determine the correlation between first and second aspirations and factors that may play a role in variability between them.

METHODS

Sixty patients with less than 90 days between aspirations and no intervening surgery were identified at our institution and classified by Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria as infected, not infected, or not able to determine after both aspirations. Culture results from both aspirations were recorded. The rates of change and correlation in clinical diagnosis and culture results between aspirations were determined.

RESULTS

Repeat aspiration changed the diagnosis in 26 cases (43.3%, 95% confidence interval 31.6-55.9, kappa coefficient 0.32, P < .001), and the culture results in 25 cases (41.7%, 95% confidence interval 30.1-54.3, kappa coefficient 0.27, P < .01). Among patients initially MSIS negative, the proportion who changed to MSIS positive was greater for those with a history of prior PJI compared to those without (66.7% vs 0%, P < .05), and the first aspiration mean volume was higher for those changed to MSIS positive compared to those that remained MSIS negative (12.0 vs 3.0 mL, P < .01). Among patients initially MSIS positive, the proportion of patients who changed to MSIS negative was greater for those with a history of adverse local tissue reaction (ALTR) to metal debris compared to patients without suspicion of ALTR (100% vs 7.7%, P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Repeat aspiration is particularly useful in patients with conflicting clinical data and prior history of PJI, suspicion of ALTR, or with high clinical suspicion of infection.

Prevention and detection of prosthetic temporomandibular joint infections-update

Prosthetic joint infections are not only distressing complications for patients and surgeons, but also have an enormous financial impact on healthcare systems. The reported incidence of prosthetic joint infection is likely underestimated due to difficulties in their diagnosis. This unfortunate complication has challenged joint replacement surgeons for years, despite all the advances made in this surgical discipline. Since eradication of these infections can be very difficult, prevention remains the primary objective. Identifying recipient risk factors, adopting a proper surgical technique, appropriate wound care, optimizing the operating room environment, and appropriate postoperative care have become some of the core elements that can help to minimize the overall incidence of this complication. The purpose of this article is to provide the temporomandibular joint replacement surgeon with an update on the prevention and detection of prosthetic joint infections based on a review of the most recent information published in the orthopedic and surgical literature.

Current Recommendations for the Diagnosis of Acute and Chronic PJI for Hip and Knee-Cell Counts, Alpha-Defensin, Leukocyte Esterase, Next-generation Sequencing

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite significant progress in recent years, the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a challenge and no gold standard test exists. A combination of serological, synovial, microbiological, histological, and radiological investigations is performed that are expensive, often invasive, and imperfect. Novel biomarkers and molecular methods have shown promise in recent years. The purpose of this review is to provide an update about the diagnostic recommendations for PJI and cover a selection of emerging diagnostic tools.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent literature highlights a new evidence-based definition for diagnosing hip and knee PJI that shows excellent performance on formal external multi-institutional validation. There is also increasing evidence to support the measurement of selected biomarkers in serum and synovial fluid, such as alpha-defensin, D-dimer, and interleukin-6. Finally, the emerging utility of next-generation sequencing for pathogen identification is discussed. In summary, we describe current recommendations and emerging tests for the diagnosis of PJI. Residual limitations and directions for future research are also discussed.