I J Banke1, N Stade2, P M Prodinger2, H M Mühlhofer2, P Thomas3, B Thomas3, B Summer3, M van Griensven4, R von Eisenhart-Rothe2, H Gollwitzer2,5. 1. Klinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Deutschland. ingo.banke@mri.tum.de. 2. Klinik und Poliklinik für Orthopädie und Sportorthopädie, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Deutschland. 3. Klinik und Poliklinik für Dermatologie und Allergologie der LMU München, Frauenlobstraße 9-11, 80337, München, Deutschland. 4. Experimentelle Unfallchirurgie, Klinik und Poliklinik für Unfallchirurgie, Klinikum rechts der Isar der TU München, Ismaninger Str. 22, 81675, München, Deutschland. 5. ATOS Klinik München, Effnerstr. 38, 81925, München, Deutschland.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The diagnosis and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remain true clinical challenges. PJI diminishes therapeutic success, causes dissatisfaction for the patient and medical staff, and often requires extensive surgical revision(s). At the present time, an extensive multimodal algorithmic approach is used to avoid time- and cost-consuming diagnostic aberrations. However, especially in the case of the frequent and clinically most relevant "low-grade" PJI, the current diagnostic "gold standard" has reached its limits. EVALUATION: Synovial biomarkers are thought to close this diagnostic gap, hopefully enabling the safe differentiation among aseptic, (chronic) septic, implant allergy-related and the arthrofibrotic genesis of symptomatic arthroplasty. Therefore, joint aspiration for obtaining synovial fluid is preferred over surgical synovial tissue biopsy because of the faster results, greater practicability, greater patient safety, and lower costs. In addition to the parameters synovial IL-6, CRP, and leukocyte esterase, novel biomarkers such as antimicrobial peptides and other proinflammatory cytokines are currently highlighted because of their very high to excellent diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSION: Independent multicenter validation studies are required to show whether a set of different innovative synovial fluid biomarkers rather than a few single parameters is favorable for a safe "one-stop shop" differential diagnosis of PJI.
BACKGROUND: The diagnosis and treatment of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remain true clinical challenges. PJI diminishes therapeutic success, causes dissatisfaction for the patient and medical staff, and often requires extensive surgical revision(s). At the present time, an extensive multimodal algorithmic approach is used to avoid time- and cost-consuming diagnostic aberrations. However, especially in the case of the frequent and clinically most relevant "low-grade" PJI, the current diagnostic "gold standard" has reached its limits. EVALUATION: Synovial biomarkers are thought to close this diagnostic gap, hopefully enabling the safe differentiation among aseptic, (chronic) septic, implant allergy-related and the arthrofibrotic genesis of symptomatic arthroplasty. Therefore, joint aspiration for obtaining synovial fluid is preferred over surgical synovial tissue biopsy because of the faster results, greater practicability, greater patient safety, and lower costs. In addition to the parameters synovial IL-6, CRP, and leukocyte esterase, novel biomarkers such as antimicrobial peptides and other proinflammatory cytokines are currently highlighted because of their very high to excellent diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSION: Independent multicenter validation studies are required to show whether a set of different innovative synovial fluid biomarkers rather than a few single parameters is favorable for a safe "one-stop shop" differential diagnosis of PJI.
Authors: V Krenn; L Morawietz; G Perino; H Kienapfel; R Ascherl; G J Hassenpflug; M Thomsen; P Thomas; M Huber; D Kendoff; D Baumhoer; M G Krukemeyer; S Natu; F Boettner; J Zustin; B Kölbel; W Rüther; J P Kretzer; A Tiemann; A Trampuz; L Frommelt; R Tichilow; S Söder; S Müller; J Parvizi; U Illgner; T Gehrke Journal: Pathol Res Pract Date: 2014-10-17 Impact factor: 3.250
Authors: G Singh; J V Nuechtern; H Meyer; G M Fiedler; F Awiszus; S Junk-Jantsch; M Bruegel; G Pflueger; C H Lohmann Journal: Bone Joint J Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 5.082
Authors: Peter Thomas; Christine von der Helm; Christoph Schopf; Farhad Mazoochian; Lars Frommelt; Hans Gollwitzer; Josef Schneider; Michael Flaig; Veit Krenn; Benjamin Thomas; Burkhard Summer Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2015-03-19 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Carl Deirmengian; Keith Kardos; Patrick Kilmartin; Simmi Gulati; Patrick Citrano; Robert E Booth Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Thomas M Randau; Max J Friedrich; Matthias D Wimmer; Ben Reichert; Dominik Kuberra; Birgit Stoffel-Wagner; Andreas Limmer; Dieter C Wirtz; Sascha Gravius Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-02-21 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Carl Deirmengian; Keith Kardos; Patrick Kilmartin; Alexander Cameron; Kevin Schiller; Javad Parvizi Journal: Clin Orthop Relat Res Date: 2014-11 Impact factor: 4.176
Authors: Ingo J Banke; Niko Stade; Peter M Prodinger; Jutta Tübel; Alexander Hapfelmeier; Rüdiger von Eisenhart-Rothe; Martijn van Griensven; Hans Gollwitzer; Rainer Burgkart Journal: Eur J Med Res Date: 2020-08-17 Impact factor: 2.175