TY - JOUR
T1 - Synovial fluid α defensin has comparable accuracy to synovial fluid white blood cell count and polymorphonuclear percentage for periprosthetic joint infection diagnosis
AU - Ivy, M. I.
AU - Sharma, K.
AU - Greenwood-Quaintance, K. E.
AU - Tande, A. J.
AU - Osmon, D. R.
AU - Berbari, E. F.
AU - Mandrekar, J.
AU - Beauchamp, C. P.
AU - Hanssen, A. D.
AU - Abdel, M. P.
AU - Lewallen, D. G.
AU - Perry, K.
AU - Block, D. R.
AU - Snyder, M. R.
AU - Patel, R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021 The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery doi:10.1302/0301-620X.103B6. BJJ-2020-1741.R1 $2.00
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85107323579&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85107323579&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1302/0301-620X.103B6.BJJ-2020-1741.R1
DO - 10.1302/0301-620X.103B6.BJJ-2020-1741.R1
M3 - Article
C2 - 34058872
AN - SCOPUS:85107323579
SN - 2049-4394
VL - 103 B
SP - 1119
EP - 1126
JO - Bone and Joint Journal
JF - Bone and Joint Journal
IS - 6
ER -