Combined serum biomarker analysis shows no benefit in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection.
Biomarker
Diagnostics
Periprosthetic joint infection
Revision joint arthroplasty
Journal
International orthopaedics
ISSN: 1432-5195
Titre abrégé: Int Orthop
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 7705431
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
12 2020
12 2020
Historique:
received:
01
03
2020
accepted:
14
07
2020
pubmed:
28
7
2020
medline:
15
4
2021
entrez:
27
7
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
In many cases, the diagnosis of a periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) consisting of the clinical appearance, laboratory tests, and other diagnostic tools remains a difficult task. Single serum biomarkers are easy to collect, are suitable for periodical assessment, and are a crucial tool in PJI diagnosis, but limited sensitivity or specificity is reported in literature. The aim of this study was to combine the best-performing single serum biomarkers into a multi-biomarker model aiming to improve the diagnostic properties. Within a 27-month period, 124 surgical procedures (aseptic or septic revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA) or total hip arthroplasty (THA)) were prospectively included. The serum leukocyte count, C-reactive protein (CRP), interleukin-6, procalcitonin, interferon alpha, and fibrinogen were assessed 1 day prior to surgery. Logistic regression with lasso-regularization was used for the biomarkers and all their ratios. After randomly splitting the data into a training (75%) and a test set (25%), the multi-biomarker model was calculated and validated in a cross-validation approach. CRP (AUC 0.91, specificity 0.67, sensitivity 0.90, p value 0.03) and fibrinogen (AUC 0.93, specificity 0.73, sensitivity 0.94, p value 0.02) had the best single-biomarker performances. The multi-biomarker model including fibrinogen, CRP, the ratio of fibrinogen to CRP, and the ratio of serum thrombocytes to CRP showed a similar performance (AUC 0.95, specificity 0.91, sensitivity 0.72, p value 0.01). In this study, multiple biomarkers were tested for their diagnostic performance, with CRP and fibrinogen showing the best results regarding the AUC, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity. It was not possible to further increase the diagnostic accuracy by combining multiple biomarkers using sophisticated statistical methods.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32712786
doi: 10.1007/s00264-020-04731-6
pii: 10.1007/s00264-020-04731-6
pmc: PMC7679358
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers
0
C-Reactive Protein
9007-41-4
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
2515-2520Références
J Stat Softw. 2010;33(1):1-22
pubmed: 20808728
J Arthroplasty. 2019 Feb;34(2S):S187-S195
pubmed: 30348554
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2019 Apr;23(2 Suppl):43-50
pubmed: 30977870
J Arthroplasty. 2017 Sep;32(9S):S232-S235
pubmed: 28712799
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019 Apr 3;101(7):635-649
pubmed: 30946198
Sci Rep. 2018 Jun 11;8(1):8802
pubmed: 29892047
Int Orthop. 2018 Jun;42(6):1213-1226
pubmed: 29294147
Clin Infect Dis. 2013 Jan;56(1):e1-e25
pubmed: 23223583
J Arthroplasty. 2013 Sep;28(8):1329-32
pubmed: 23602418
N Engl J Med. 2004 Oct 14;351(16):1645-54
pubmed: 15483283
Semin Immunopathol. 2012 Jan;34(1):43-62
pubmed: 22037947
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017 Sep 6;99(17):1419-1427
pubmed: 28872523
Open Orthop J. 2016 Nov 30;10:654-661
pubmed: 28144375
Cancer. 1950 Jan;3(1):32-5
pubmed: 15405679
Bone Joint J. 2017 May;99-B(5):660-665
pubmed: 28455476
Br J Biomed Sci. 2010;67(2):71-6
pubmed: 20669762
Bone Joint Res. 2018 Jan;7(1):85-93
pubmed: 29363518
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2019 Apr 3;101(7):613-619
pubmed: 30946195
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007 Apr;89(4):780-5
pubmed: 17403800
J Orthop Surg Res. 2019 May 14;14(1):133
pubmed: 31088508
EFORT Open Rev. 2017 Mar 13;1(7):275-278
pubmed: 28461959
J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017 Dec 20;99(24):2077-2084
pubmed: 29257013
Mol Med. 2011 May-Jun;17(5-6):568-73
pubmed: 21210072
J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2007 Jan;89(1):94-9
pubmed: 17259424
Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011 Nov;469(11):2992-4
pubmed: 21938532
J Arthroplasty. 2020 Jan;35(1):229-234
pubmed: 31526698