C Ronde-Oustau1, Y Diesinger2, J-Y Jenny3, M Antoni2, J Gaudias2, C Boeri2, J Sibilia1, J-M Lessinger4. 1. Service de rhumatologie, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, avenue Molière, 67200 Strasbourg, France. 2. Centre de chirurgie orthopédique et de la main, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, 10, avenue Baumann, 67400 Illkirch, France. 3. Centre de chirurgie orthopédique et de la main, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, 10, avenue Baumann, 67400 Illkirch, France. Electronic address: jean-yves.jenny@chru-strasbourg.fr. 4. Laboratoire de biochimie et biologie moléculaire, Hôpitaux Universitaires de Strasbourg, 1, place de l'Hôpital, 67000 Strasbourg, France.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection often raises diagnostic challenges, as the published criteria are heterogeneous. New markers for predicting periprosthetic infection have been evaluated. Here, we assessed one of these markers, C-reactive protein (CRP), in joint fluid. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesised that intra-articular CRP levels would perform better than serum CRP concentrations in diagnosing knee prosthesis infection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively included 30 patients including 10 with native-knee effusions, 11 with prosthetic-knee aseptic effusions, and 11 with prosthetic-knee infection defined using 2011 Musculoskeletal Society criteria. Serum CRP was assayed using turbidimetry or nephelometry and intra-articular CRP using nephelometry. Appropriate statistical tests were performed to compare the three groups; P values < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Serum and intra-articular CRP levels were 5- to 16-fold higher in the group with periprosthetic infection than in the other two groups. Although the areas under the ROC curves were not significantly different, the likelihood ratios associated with the selected cut-offs suggested superiority of intra-articular CRP: a value > 2.78 mg/L suggested possible infection (100% sensitivity and 82% specificity) and a value > 5.37 mg/L probable infection (90% sensitivity and 91% specificity). DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest a possible role for intra-articular CRP assay in diagnosing knee prosthesis infection and perhaps periprosthetic infection at any site. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study, development of a diagnostic criterion in consecutive patients comparatively to a reference standard.
BACKGROUND: Periprosthetic joint infection often raises diagnostic challenges, as the published criteria are heterogeneous. New markers for predicting periprosthetic infection have been evaluated. Here, we assessed one of these markers, C-reactive protein (CRP), in joint fluid. HYPOTHESIS: We hypothesised that intra-articularCRP levels would perform better than serum CRP concentrations in diagnosing knee prosthesis infection. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We prospectively included 30 patients including 10 with native-knee effusions, 11 with prosthetic-knee aseptic effusions, and 11 with prosthetic-knee infection defined using 2011 Musculoskeletal Society criteria. Serum CRP was assayed using turbidimetry or nephelometry and intra-articularCRP using nephelometry. Appropriate statistical tests were performed to compare the three groups; P values < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Serum and intra-articularCRP levels were 5- to 16-fold higher in the group with periprosthetic infection than in the other two groups. Although the areas under the ROC curves were not significantly different, the likelihood ratios associated with the selected cut-offs suggested superiority of intra-articularCRP: a value > 2.78 mg/L suggested possible infection (100% sensitivity and 82% specificity) and a value > 5.37 mg/L probable infection (90% sensitivity and 91% specificity). DISCUSSION: Our findings suggest a possible role for intra-articularCRP assay in diagnosing knee prosthesis infection and perhaps periprosthetic infection at any site. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level III, diagnostic study, development of a diagnostic criterion in consecutive patients comparatively to a reference standard.
Authors: Salvatore J Frangiamore; Marcelo B P Siqueira; Anas Saleh; Thomas Daly; Carlos A Higuera; Wael K Barsoum Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2016-07 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Sufian S Ahmad; Michael T Hirschmann; Roland Becker; Ahmed Shaker; Atesch Ateschrang; Marius J B Keel; Christoph E Albers; Lukas Buetikofer; Sithombo Maqungo; Ulrich Stöckle; Sandro Kohl Journal: Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc Date: 2018-03-20 Impact factor: 4.342