We have located links that may give you full text access.
Diagnosing periprosthetic hip joint low-grade infection via arthroscopic neo synovium biopsies.
Technology and Health Care : Official Journal of the European Society for Engineering and Medicine 2018 June 28
BACKGROUND: There is currently a lack of consensus regarding the most effective diagnostic algorithm for cases of supposed low-grade infection after total hip arthoplasty (THA).
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess reliability in the use of biopsies, obtained by hip arthroscopy, to detect a periprosthetic hip joint infection (PJI).
METHODS: From 2012 to 2016, diagnostic arthroscopy of the hip joint was performed in 20 patients with a supposed PJI following THA. In 10 of these patients, the THA was revised for various reasons after diagnostic arthroscopy. The microbiological and histological findings of the biopsies obtained by arthroscopy were compared to findings from intraoperative samples of the revision arthroplasty.
RESULTS: For arthroscopic biopsies, we detected a sensitivity of 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-1.00), a specificity of 0.83 (95% CI 0.36-1.00), a positive predictive value of 0.80 (95% CI 0.28-1.00), and a negative predictive value of 1.00 (95% CI 0.48-1.00). The accuracy was 0.90.
CONCLUSIONS: The analysis of arthroscopic biopsies represents a helpful tool to verify or rule out a PJI in selected patients. Nevertheless, minimally invasive diagnostic tools (e.g., laboratory analysis and aspiration) should be utilized beforehand.
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess reliability in the use of biopsies, obtained by hip arthroscopy, to detect a periprosthetic hip joint infection (PJI).
METHODS: From 2012 to 2016, diagnostic arthroscopy of the hip joint was performed in 20 patients with a supposed PJI following THA. In 10 of these patients, the THA was revised for various reasons after diagnostic arthroscopy. The microbiological and histological findings of the biopsies obtained by arthroscopy were compared to findings from intraoperative samples of the revision arthroplasty.
RESULTS: For arthroscopic biopsies, we detected a sensitivity of 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40-1.00), a specificity of 0.83 (95% CI 0.36-1.00), a positive predictive value of 0.80 (95% CI 0.28-1.00), and a negative predictive value of 1.00 (95% CI 0.48-1.00). The accuracy was 0.90.
CONCLUSIONS: The analysis of arthroscopic biopsies represents a helpful tool to verify or rule out a PJI in selected patients. Nevertheless, minimally invasive diagnostic tools (e.g., laboratory analysis and aspiration) should be utilized beforehand.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Diagnosis and Management of Cardiac Sarcoidosis: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 19
Essential thrombocythaemia: A contemporary approach with new drugs on the horizon.British Journal of Haematology 2024 April 9
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app