Clinical Evaluation of Alpha Defensin Test Following Staged Treatment of Prosthetic Joint Infections

Leukocyte scintigraphy has high specificity but low sensitivity in diagnosing persistent periprosthetic joint infection before reimplantation in two-stage revision

INTRODUCTION

Two-stage revision is considered the gold standard treatment in chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) but no specific criteria or examination exist to determine infection eradication before reimplantation. This study aimed to assess the diagnostic performance of leukocyte scintigraphy after the first-stage procedure in two-stage revision for chronic PJI.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Patients studied with leukocyte scintigraphy after cement spacer insertion for knee PJI from January 2012 to December 2021 were retrospectively included. Infection was diagnosed using the criteria of the 2018 International Consensus Meeting. When 1 or more minor criteria were positive but the score was < 6, patients were considered not infected if there was no recurrence of infection at least 24 months after the second-stage procedure. Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy were found.

RESULTS

The final cohort included 67 cases in 61 patients (M: F = 32:35; mean age 74 years). There were 43 true negatives, 8 true positives, 12 false negatives, and 4 false positives. The sensitivity and specificity of leukocyte scintigraphy in diagnosing PJI were respectively 40.0% and 91.5%, PPV was 66.7%, NPV was 78.2%, and accuracy was 76.1%. Staphylococcus Epidermidis was the most frequently isolated microorganism (50%).

CONCLUSION

Due to the high costs and the difficulty in its execution, LLS should not be used routinely but it could represent an additional criterion in doubtful cases. In any case, a thorough evaluation of other pre- and intra-operative tests is essential to determine whether reimplantation or spacer renewal is the best course of action. Special consideration should be given to positive LLS, as its results are highly specific and have a low rate of false positives. Conversely, in over half of infected patients, LLS could give false negatives, making negative LLS results less relevant.

Comparison of Five-Day vs. Fourteen-Day Incubation of Cultures for Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Hip Arthroplasty

Background: Periprosthetic joint infections (PJI) are among the most morbid complications in total hip arthroplasty (THA). The ideal incubation time, however, for intraoperative cultures for PJI diagnosis remains unclear. As such, the aim of this study was to determine if any differences existed in culture-positive rates and organism detection between five-day and fourteen-day cultures. Methods: This retrospective cohort study consisted of THA cases diagnosed with PJI performed between May 2014 and May 2020 at a single tertiary-care institution. Analyses compared five-day and fourteen-day cultures and carried out a pre-specified subgroup analysis by organism and PJI type. Results: A total of 147 surgeries were performed in 101 patients (57.1% females), of which 65% (n = 98) obtained five-day cultures and 34% (n = 49) obtained fourteen-day cultures. The positive culture rate was 67.3% (n = 99) with Staphylococcus aureus being the most common pathogen identified (n = 41 specimens, 41.4%). The positive culture rate was not significantly different between groups (66.3% five-day, 69.4% fourteen-day, p = 0.852). Fourteen-day cultures had a significantly longer time-to-positive culture (5.0 days) than five-day cultures (3.0 days, p < 0.001), a higher rate of fungi (5.6% vs. 0%), and a lower rate of Gram-negatives (4.5% vs. 18.7%, p = 0.016). Conclusions: Fourteen-day cultures did not increase the positivity rate, had higher rates of slow-growth pathogens, and had a longer time-to-positivization than five-day cultures. Prolonged culture holds may provide more thorough organism detection for PJI without increasing the diagnostic culture yield.

Upcoming evidence in clinical practice of two-stage revision arthroplasty for prosthetic joint infection

Total joint arthroplasty is the recommended treatment for patients with end-stage osteoarthritis, as it reduces disability and pain and restores joint function. However, prosthetic joint infection is a serious complication of this procedure, with the two-stage exchange being the most common treatment method. While there is consensus on diagnosing prosthetic joint infection, there is a lack of agreement on the parameters that can guide the surgeon in performing definitive reimplantation in a two-stage procedure. One approach that has been suggested to improve the accuracy of microbiologic investigations before definitive reimplantation is to observe a holiday period from antibiotic therapy to improve the accuracy of cultures from periprosthetic tissues, but these cultures report some degree of aspecificity. Therefore, several pieces of evidence highlight that performing reimplantation using continuous antibiotic therapy should be considered a safe and effective approach, leading to higher cure rates and a shorter period of disability. Dosage of C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ERS) and D-dimer are helpful in diagnosing prosthetic joint infection, but only D-dimer has shown sufficient accuracy in predicting the risk of infection recurrence after a two-stage procedure. Synovial fluid analysis before reimplantation has been shown to be the most accurate in predicting recurrence, and new cutoff values for leukocyte count and neutrophil percentage have shown a useful predictive rule to identify patients at risk of unfavourable outcome. A new scoring system based on a numerical score calculated from the beta coefficient derived through multivariate analysis of D-dimer levels, synovial fluid leukocytes and relative neutrophils percentage has demonstrated high accuracy when it comes to guiding the second step of two-stage procedure. In conclusion, reimplantation may be a suitable option for patients who are on continuous therapy without local symptoms, and with CRP and ERS within the normal range, with low synovial fluid leukocytes (< 952/mL) and a low relative neutrophil percentage (< 52%) and D-dimer below 1100 µg/mL. A numerical score derived from analysing these three parameters can serve as a valuable tool in determining the feasibility of reimplantation in these patients.

Interval between two-stage exchanges: what is optimal and how do you know?

BACKGROUND

Two-stage exchange arthroplasty remains the most popular option for the treatment of chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Determining infection eradication and optimal timing of reimplantation can be challenging. Information to allow for a truly informed evidence-based decision is scarce.

METHODS

We conducted a critical review of available evidence on the presently available tests to help determine timing of reimplantation.

RESULTS

Serology is traditionally used to follow up patients after the first stage. Despite tradition mandates waiting for normal inflammatory markers, there is actually no evidence that they correlate with persistent infection. The role of synovial fluid investigation between stages is also explored. Cultures lack sensitivity and neither differential leukocyte counts nor alternative biomarkers have proven to be accurate in identifying persistent infection with a spacer in situ. We also examined the evidence regarding the optimal time interval between resection and reimplantation and whether there is evidence to support the implementation of a two week "antibiotic holiday" prior to proceeding with reimplantation. Finally, wound healing and other important factors in this setting will be discussed.

CONCLUSION

Currently there are no accurate metrics to aid in the decision on the optimal timing for reimplantation. Decision must therefore rely on the resolution of clinical signs and down trending serological and synovial markers.

Utility of Diagnostic Tests Before Reimplantation in Patients Undergoing 2-Stage Revision Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication after total joint arthroplasty (TJA), with treatment failure occurring in 12% to 28% after 2-stage revision. It is vital to identify diagnostic tools indicative of persistent infection or treatment failure after 2-stage revision for PJI.

METHODS

The Cochrane Library, PubMed (MEDLINE), and EMBASE were searched for randomized controlled trials and comparative observational studies published before October 3, 2021, which evaluated the utility of serum/plasma biomarkers (erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR], C-reactive protein [CRP], interleukin-6 [IL-6], fibrinogen, D-dimer), synovial biomarkers (white blood cell [WBC] count, neutrophil percentage [PMN %], alpha-defensin [AD], leukocyte esterase [LE]), tissue frozen section, tissue culture, synovial fluid culture, or sonicated spacer fluid culture indicative of persistent infection before the second stage of 2-stage revision for PJI or treatment failure after 2-stage revision for PJI.

RESULTS

A total of 47 studies including 6,605 diagnostic tests among 3,781 2-stage revisions for PJI were analyzed. Among those cases, 723 (19.1%) experienced persistent infection or treatment failure. Synovial LE (sensitivity 0.25 [0.10-0.47], specificity 0.99 [0.93-1.00], positive likelihood ratio 14.0 [1.45-135.58]) and serum IL-6 (sensitivity 0.52 [0.33-0.70], specificity 0.92 [0.85-0.96], positive likelihood ratio 7.90 [0.86-72.61]) had the highest diagnostic accuracy. However, no biomarker was associated with a clinically useful negative likelihood ratio. In subgroup analysis, synovial PMN %, synovial fluid culture, serum ESR, and serum CRP had limited utility for detecting persistent infection before reimplantation (positive likelihood ratios ranging 2.33-3.74; negative likelihood ratios ranging 0.31-0.9) and no utility for predicting failure after the second stage of 2-stage revision.

CONCLUSIONS

Synovial WBC count, synovial PMN %, synovial fluid culture, serum ESR, and serum CRP have modest sensitivity and specificity for predicting persistent infection during the second stage of 2-stage revision, suggesting some combination of these diagnostic tests might be useful before reimplantation. No biomarker or culture accurately predicted treatment failure after reimplantation.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Alpha-Defensin Offers Limited Utility in Work-Up Prior to Reimplantation in Chronic Periprosthetic Joint Infection in Total Joint Arthroplasty Patients

BACKGROUND

Alpha-defensin (AD) is a synovial biomarker included in the 2018 consensus criteria for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Its value in assessing eradication of infection prior to second stage reimplantation is unclear. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of AD on eligibility for reimplantation following resection for chronic PJI.

METHODS

This study included patients who previously underwent resection arthroplasty for PJI. Synovial fluid aspirated from 87 patients was retrospectively reviewed. All patients completed a 6-week course of intravenous antibiotics and an appropriate drug holiday. Synovial white blood cell count, percentage neutrophils, and culture from the AD immunoassay laboratory were reviewed with serum erythrocyte sedimentation rate and C-reactive protein values from our institution. A modified version of the 2018 consensus criteria was used, including white blood cell count, percentage neutrophils, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and C-reactive protein. AD was then added to determine if it changed diagnosis or clinical management.

RESULTS

Four patients were categorized as "infected" (score >6), none exhibited a positive AD or positive culture. Sixty eight patients were diagnosed as "possibly infected" (score 2 to 5), none had a positive AD, and one had a positive culture (Cutibacterium acnes). AD did not change the diagnosis from "possibly infected" to "infected" in any case or alter treatment plans. Fifteen patients had a score of <2 (not infected) and none had a positive AD.

CONCLUSION

The routine use of AD in the work-up prior to a second-stage arthroplasty procedure for PJI may not be warranted.

Reliable Diagnostic Tests and Thresholds for Preoperative Diagnosis of Non-Inflammatory Arthritis Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Meta-analysis and Systematic Review

Objective

The current diagnostic criteria for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) are diverse and controversial, leading to delayed diagnosis. This study aimed to evaluate and unify their diagnostic accuracy and the threshold selection of serum and synovial routine tests for PJI at an early stage.

Methods

We searched the MEDLINE and Embase databases for retrospective or prospective studies which reported preoperative‐available assays (serum, synovial, or culture tests) for the diagnosis of chronic PJI among inflammatory arthritis (IA) or non‐IA populations from January 1, 2000 to June 30, 2022. Threshold effective analysis was performed on synovial polymorphonuclear neutrophils (PMN%), synovial white blood cell (WBC), serum C‐reactive protein (CRP), and erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) to find the relevant cut‐offs.

Results

Two hundred and sixteen studies and information from 45,316 individuals were included in the final analysis. Synovial laboratory‐based α‐defensin and calprotectin had the best comprehensive sensitivity (0.91 [0.86–0.94], 0.95 [0.88–0.98]) and specificity (0.96 [0.94‐0.97], 0.95 [0.89–0.98]) values. According to the threshold effect analysis, the recommended cut‐offs are 70% (sensitivity 0.89 [0.85–0.92], specificity 0.90 [0.87–0.93]), 4100/μL (sensitivity 0.90 [0.87–0.93], specificity 0.97 [0.93–0.98]), 13.5 mg/L (sensitivity 0.84 [0.78–0.89], specificity 0.83 [0.73–0.89]), and 30 mm/h (sensitivity 0.79 [0.74–0.83], specificity 0.78 [0.72–0.83]) for synovial PMN%, synovial WBC, serum CRP, and ESR, respectively, and tests seem to be more reliable among non‐IA patients.

Conclusions

The laboratory‐based synovial α‐defensin and synovial calprotectin are the two best independent preoperative diagnostic tests for PJI. A cut off of 70% for synovial PMN% and tighter cut‐offs for synovial WBC and serum CRP could have a better diagnostic accuracy for non‐IA patients with chronic PJI.

What is the Clinical Utility of Synovial Alpha Defensin Testing of Antibiotic Spacers Before Reimplantation?

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic performance of standalone alpha defensin (AD) testing of antibiotic spacers during two stage exchange and to determine if the addition of AD testing to other commonly used laboratory tests improves the ability to detect persistent infection in an antibiotic spacer.

METHODS

Cases of two-stage exchange for periprosthetic joint infection from 2016 to 2019 at a single institution were retrospectively reviewed. Cases were classified as persistently infected or not infected in accordance with 2014 and 2018 Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria to determine if AD provided any clinical utility beyond the other commonly used tests that make up both criteria. Delphi Consensus criteria at 1 year were used as the gold standard for determining recurrent periprosthetic joint infection.

RESULTS

Fifty-two spacers (25 hips and 27 knees) in 51 patients were included for analysis. Five spacers were persistently infected based on Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria. One spacer underwent reresection and the remaining 4 underwent reimplantation with no subsequent infectious complications. All 48 patients who were categorized as not infected underwent reimplantation; at 1 year postoperatively, 7 (13%) had failed due to infection. Three spacers (6%) had a positive AD test. Two spacers with positive AD tests underwent reimplantation, neither had failed at 1 year postoperatively. Sensitivity of standalone AD testing was 0%, and specificity was 96%.

CONCLUSION

Standalone AD testing for the purpose of predicting repeat infection after two-stage exchange arthroplasty exhibits sensitivity of 0% and low predictive value. Addition of synovial AD testing did not increase the diagnostic performance of commonly used synovial and serologic markers of infection.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

IV-retrospective cohort study.

The 2018 New Definition of Periprosthetic Joint Infection is Valuable for Diagnosis of Persistent Infection at Reimplantation in Patients without Synovial Fluid

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of persistent infection at reimplantation of 2-stage exchange revision is a challenging problem. The aim of our study is to evaluate the performance of the 2018 new definition and Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria in determining the persistent infection at reimplantation in patients without synovial fluid.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed 150 patients who underwent 2-stage exchange revision from 2014 to 2018. Two models were used to define persistent infection-model 1: identical major criteria of the MSIS criteria and new definition and model 2: identical major criteria of 2 criteria and/or subsequent infection after reimplantation. The predictive accuracy of the new definition and MSIS criteria was compared by using receiver operating characteristic curves.

RESULTS

The receiver operating characteristic curves showed that the new definition had good performance in determining the persistent infection, with the area under the curve (AUC) of 0.871 in model 1 and 0.835 in model 2. The optimal threshold for aggregate scores in new definition was 4. The MSIS criteria had limited diagnostic value in both model 1 (AUC = 0.708) and model 2 (AUC = 0.664). In model 1, the sensitivity and specificity were 86.96% and 84.25% in new definition, and 47.83% and 93.70% in MSIS criteria in patients without synovial fluid. In model 2, the sensitivity and specificity were 78.57% and 85.25% in new definition, and 39.29% and 93.44% in MSIS criteria.

CONCLUSION

The 2018 new definition of PJI is valuable in the diagnosis of persistent infection, which can improve diagnostic accuracy compared with the MSIS criteria in patients without synovial fluid.

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.

The value of calprotectin in synovial fluid for the diagnosis of chronic prosthetic joint infection

Aims

This study aimed to evaluate calprotectin in synovial fluid for diagnosing chronic prosthetic joint infection (PJI) .

Methods

A total of 63 patients who were suspected of PJI were enrolled. The synovial fluid calprotectin was tested by an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). Laboratory test data, such as ESR, CRP, synovial fluid white blood cells (SF-WBCs), and synovial fluid polymorphonuclear cells (SF-PMNs), were documented. Chi-squared tests were used to compare the sensitivity and specificity of calprotectin and laboratory tests. The area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was calculated to determine diagnostic efficacy.

Results

The median calprotectin level was 776 μg/ml (interquartile range (IQR) 536.5 to 1132) in the PJI group and 54.5 μg/ml (IQR, 38.75 to 78.25) in the aseptic failure (AF) group (p < 0.05). Using a threshold of 173 ug/ml, the sensitivity was 95.2%, with a 97.6% specificity, and the AUC was 0.993. The sensitivity of calprotectin of the antibiotic-treated PJI group was 100% versus 90.9% of the non-antibiotic-treated PJI group. Although 47.6% (ten cases) of the patients in the PJI group received antibiotics before aspiration, the diagnostic efficacy of calprotectin was not affected. The sensitivity and specificity of ESR, CRP, SF-WBCs, and SF-PMNs ranged from 76.2% to 90.5% and 64.3% to 85.7%, respectively.

Conclusion

Calprotectin in synovial fluid has great diagnostic efficacy for PJI diagnosisand outperformed ESR, CRP, SF-WBCs, and SF-PMNs.

Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2020;9(8):450–457.

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.

Does serum interleukin-6 guide the diagnosis of persistent infection in two-stage hip revision for periprosthetic joint infection?

PURPOSE

The diagnosis of persistent infection at reimplantation of two-stage revision arthroplasty for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains challenging. Several studies have shown the benefit of serum interleukin-6 (IL-6) in diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Recent data indicated serum IL-6 could be promising in differentiating persistent infection. The purpose of this study was to validate the efficacy of serum IL-6 in diagnosing persistent infection at reimplantation.

METHODS

A retrospective review of 86 PJI patients with a two-stage exchanged hip arthroplasty from 2013 to 2017 was conducted. Persistent infection was defined using the modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria combined with follow-up results. Serum IL-6 at reimplantation were collected and compared among patients with or without persistent infection. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were generated to evaluate the diagnostic performance and optimal cut-off value of serum IL-6 at reimplantation.

RESULTS

Sixteen cases were diagnosed as persistent infection at reimplantation. There was no significant difference in serum IL-6 levels between cases with persistent infection and controls (7.89 pg/ml vs. 5.56 pg/ml; P = 0.179). The area under the ROC curve (AUC) for serum IL-6 in diagnosing persistent infection at reimplantation was 0.59 (95% confidential interval [CI] 0.40-0.77). With the calculated threshold set at 8.12 pg/ml, the corresponding sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values were 38%, 88%, 38%, and 87%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Serum IL-6 is inadequate in diagnosing persistent infection at reimplantation for two-stage revision arthroplasty. With the serum IL-6 threshold set at 8.12 pg/ml, the specificity to rule out persistent infection is high, but the sensitivity to predict persistent infection is not satisfactory.