Can pre-analytical procedures improve microbiological culture yield in patients with periprosthetic infections?
Periprosthetic joint infection
Revision arthroplasty
Tissue culture
Journal
BMC microbiology
ISSN: 1471-2180
Titre abrégé: BMC Microbiol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100966981
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 Sep 2024
10 Sep 2024
Historique:
received:
11
05
2024
accepted:
03
09
2024
medline:
11
9
2024
pubmed:
11
9
2024
entrez:
10
9
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
The detection of causative pathogens plays a crucial role in the diagnosis and targeted treatment of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). While there have been improvements in analytic methods in the past, pre-analytical procedures have not yet been sufficiently investigated. The objective of this study was to compare the culture yield of four different pre-analytical procedures. Patients with perioperative diagnosis of PJI were included in a single center cross-sectional study (2021-2022). Tissue samples (n = 20) of each patient were randomly and equally distributed to each of the four study arms. Tissue samples were either send to the laboratory without culture medium (group A) or were transported in thioglycolate medium immediately after sampling at three different temperatures (room temperature, 4 °C, 37° for 24 h; group B-D). Culture media were investigated for growth on days 1, 3, 7, 12, 14. All organisms, the number of positive samples and the time to positivity were recorded and compared between the study arms. Single positive cultures were considered as contamination. In total, 71 patients were included. The proportions of culture negative samples (10-15%) and polymicrobial infections (51-54%) were comparable between the four arms. Seven patients (10%) were culture-negative in group A, but showed growth in thioglycolate media (group B-D). Furthermore, 13% of patients showed growth in all groups, but additional organisms were cultured in thioglycolate. There was growth beyond day 7 of culturing only in thioglycolate, but not in group A. A storage temperature of 4 °C showed a longer time to positivity compared to the other groups (p < 0.001). Pre-analytical storage of tissue samples in thioglycolate broth did not improve the culture yield and did not detect additional cases of infection compared to the standard (pre-analytical storage in sterile containers). However, including a thioglycolate medium to the sampling algorithm reduced the rate of culture-negative infections and helped to identify additional organisms.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
The detection of causative pathogens plays a crucial role in the diagnosis and targeted treatment of periprosthetic joint infections (PJI). While there have been improvements in analytic methods in the past, pre-analytical procedures have not yet been sufficiently investigated. The objective of this study was to compare the culture yield of four different pre-analytical procedures.
METHODS
METHODS
Patients with perioperative diagnosis of PJI were included in a single center cross-sectional study (2021-2022). Tissue samples (n = 20) of each patient were randomly and equally distributed to each of the four study arms. Tissue samples were either send to the laboratory without culture medium (group A) or were transported in thioglycolate medium immediately after sampling at three different temperatures (room temperature, 4 °C, 37° for 24 h; group B-D). Culture media were investigated for growth on days 1, 3, 7, 12, 14. All organisms, the number of positive samples and the time to positivity were recorded and compared between the study arms. Single positive cultures were considered as contamination.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In total, 71 patients were included. The proportions of culture negative samples (10-15%) and polymicrobial infections (51-54%) were comparable between the four arms. Seven patients (10%) were culture-negative in group A, but showed growth in thioglycolate media (group B-D). Furthermore, 13% of patients showed growth in all groups, but additional organisms were cultured in thioglycolate. There was growth beyond day 7 of culturing only in thioglycolate, but not in group A. A storage temperature of 4 °C showed a longer time to positivity compared to the other groups (p < 0.001).
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
Pre-analytical storage of tissue samples in thioglycolate broth did not improve the culture yield and did not detect additional cases of infection compared to the standard (pre-analytical storage in sterile containers). However, including a thioglycolate medium to the sampling algorithm reduced the rate of culture-negative infections and helped to identify additional organisms.
Identifiants
pubmed: 39256688
doi: 10.1186/s12866-024-03493-0
pii: 10.1186/s12866-024-03493-0
doi:
Substances chimiques
Culture Media
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
335Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Kurtz SM, Lau E, Watson H, Schmier JK, Parvizi J. Economic burden of periprosthetic joint infection in the United States. J Arthroplasty. 2012;27(8 Suppl):61–e51.
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2012.02.022
pubmed: 22554729
Pulido L, Ghanem E, Joshi A, Purtill JJ, Parvizi J. Periprosthetic joint infection: the incidence, timing, and predisposing factors. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2008;466(7):1710–5.
doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0209-4
pubmed: 18421542
pmcid: 2505241
Patel A, Pavlou G, Mújica-Mota RE, Toms AD. The epidemiology of revision total knee and hip arthroplasty in England and Wales: a comparative analysis with projections for the United States. A study using the National Joint Registry dataset. Bone Joint J. 2015;97–B(8):1076–81.
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.97B8.35170
pubmed: 26224824
Fehring KA, Abdel MP, Ollivier M, Mabry TM, Hanssen AD. Repeat two-Stage Exchange Arthroplasty for Periprosthetic knee infection is dependent on host Grade. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2017;99(1):19–24.
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.16.00075
pubmed: 28060229
Parvizi J, Ghanem E, Menashe S, Barrack RL, Bauer TW. Periprosthetic infection: what are the diagnostic challenges? J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88(Suppl 4):138–47.
pubmed: 17142443
Tan TL, Kheir MM, Shohat N, Tan DD, Kheir M, Chen C, et al. Culture-negative Periprosthetic Joint infection: an update on what to expect. JB JS Open Access. 2018;3(3):e0060.
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.OA.17.00060
pubmed: 30533595
pmcid: 6242327
Berbari EF, Marculescu C, Sia I, Lahr BD, Hanssen AD, Steckelberg JM, et al. Culture-negative prosthetic joint infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;45(9):1113–9.
doi: 10.1086/522184
pubmed: 17918072
Kalbian I, Park JW, Goswami K, Lee Y-K, Parvizi J, Koo K-H. Culture-negative periprosthetic joint infection: prevalence, aetiology, evaluation, recommendations, and treatment. Int Orthop. 2020;44(7):1255–61.
doi: 10.1007/s00264-020-04627-5
pubmed: 32449042
Trampuz A, Piper KE, Hanssen AD, Osmon DR, Cockerill FR, Steckelberg JM, et al. Sonication of explanted prosthetic components in bags for diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection is associated with risk of contamination. J Clin Microbiol. 2006;44(2):628–31.
doi: 10.1128/JCM.44.2.628-631.2006
pubmed: 16455930
pmcid: 1392705
Trampuz A, Piper KE, Jacobson MJ, Hanssen AD, Unni KK, Osmon DR, et al. Sonication of removed hip and knee prostheses for diagnosis of infection. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(7):654–63.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa061588
pubmed: 17699815
Watanabe S, Kobayashi N, Tomoyama A, Choe H, Yamazaki E, Inaba Y. Differences in Diagnostic Properties between Standard and Enrichment Culture techniques used in Periprosthetic Joint infections. J Arthroplasty. 2020;35(1):235–40.
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2019.08.035
pubmed: 31522855
Fang X, Zhang L, Cai Y, Huang Z, Li W, Zhang C, et al. Effects of different tissue specimen pretreatment methods on microbial culture results in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint Res. 2021;10(2):96–104.
doi: 10.1302/2046-3758.102.BJR-2020-0104.R3
pubmed: 33517765
pmcid: 7937541
van Cauter M, Cornu O, Yombi J-C, Rodriguez-Villalobos H, Kaminski L. The effect of storage delay and storage temperature on orthopaedic surgical samples contaminated by Staphylococcus Epidermidis. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(3):e0192048.
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0192048
pubmed: 29554102
pmcid: 5858844
Bossard DA, Ledergerber B, Zingg PO, Gerber C, Zinkernagel AS, Zbinden R, et al. Optimal length of Cultivation Time for isolation of Propionibacterium acnes in suspected bone and joint infections is more than 7 days. J Clin Microbiol. 2016;54(12):3043–9.
doi: 10.1128/JCM.01435-16
pubmed: 27733637
pmcid: 5121398
Atkins BL, Athanasou N, Deeks JJ, Crook DW, Simpson H, Peto TE, et al. Prospective evaluation of criteria for microbiological diagnosis of prosthetic-joint infection at revision arthroplasty. The OSIRIS Collaborative Study Group. J Clin Microbiol. 1998;36(10):2932–9.
doi: 10.1128/JCM.36.10.2932-2939.1998
pubmed: 9738046
pmcid: 105090
Rieber H, Frontzek A, Jerosch J, Alefeld M, Strohecker T, Ulatowski M, et al. Periprosthetic joint infection caused by anaerobes. Retrospective analysis reveals no need for prolonged cultivation time if sensitive supplemented growth media are used. Anaerobe. 2018;50:12–8.
doi: 10.1016/j.anaerobe.2018.01.009
pubmed: 29374525
Blevins KM, Goswami K, Parvizi J. The journey of cultures taken during Revision Joint Arthroplasty: Preanalytical Phase. J Bone Jt Infect. 2019;4(3):120–5.
doi: 10.7150/jbji.32975
pubmed: 31192111
pmcid: 6536803
Tarabichi S, Goh GS, Zanna L, Qadiri QS, Baker CM, Gehrke T, et al. Time to positivity of cultures obtained for Periprosthetic Joint infection. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2023;105(2):107–12.
doi: 10.2106/JBJS.22.00766
pubmed: 36574630
Talsma DT, Ploegmakers JJW, Jutte PC, Kampinga G, Wouthuyzen-Bakker M. Time to positivity of acute and chronic periprosthetic joint infection cultures. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2021;99(1):115178.
doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2020.115178
pubmed: 33017799
Birlutiu RM, Stoica CI, Russu O, Cismasiu RS, Birlutiu V. Positivity trends of bacterial cultures from cases of Acute and Chronic Periprosthetic Joint infections. J Clin Med 2022; 11(8).
McNally M, Sousa R, Wouthuyzen-Bakker M, Chen AF, Soriano A, Vogely HC, et al. Infographic: the EBJIS definition of periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint J. 2021;103–B(1):16–7.
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.103B1.BJJ-2020-2417
pubmed: 33380197
pmcid: 7954145
McNally M, Sousa R, Wouthuyzen-Bakker M, Chen AF, Soriano A, Vogely HC, et al. The EBJIS definition of periprosthetic joint infection. Bone Joint J. 2021;103–B(1):18–25.
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.103B1.BJJ-2020-1381.R1
pubmed: 33380199
pmcid: 7954183
Parvizi J, Tan TL, Goswami K, Higuera C, Della Valle C, Chen AF, et al. The 2018 definition of Periprosthetic hip and knee infection: an evidence-based and validated Criteria. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(5):1309–e13142.
doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.078
pubmed: 29551303
Parvizi J, Zmistowski B, Berbari EF, Bauer TW, Springer BD, Della Valle CJ, et al. New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(11):2992–4.
doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-2102-9
pubmed: 21938532
pmcid: 3183178
Tarabichi M, Shohat N, Goswami K, Parvizi J. Can next generation sequencing play a role in detecting pathogens in synovial fluid? Bone Joint J. 2018;100–B(2):127–33.
doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.100B2.BJJ-2017-0531.R2
pubmed: 29437053
Qu X, Zhai Z, Li H, Li H, Liu X, Zhu Z, et al. PCR-based diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection. J Clin Microbiol. 2013;51(8):2742–6.
doi: 10.1128/JCM.00657-13
pubmed: 23740731
pmcid: 3719604
Morgenstern C, Cabric S, Perka C, Trampuz A, Renz N. Synovial fluid multiplex PCR is superior to culture for detection of low-virulent pathogens causing periprosthetic joint infection. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis. 2018;90(2):115–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.diagmicrobio.2017.10.016
pubmed: 29191466
Tande AJ, Patel R. Prosthetic joint infection. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2014;27(2):302–45.
doi: 10.1128/CMR.00111-13
pubmed: 24696437
pmcid: 3993098
Klement MR, Cunningham DJ, Wooster BM, Wellman SS, Bolognesi MP, Green CL, et al. Comparing Standard Versus Extended Culture Duration in Acute hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2019;27(9):e437–43.
doi: 10.5435/JAAOS-D-17-00674
pubmed: 30431505
Baron EJ, Miller JM, Weinstein MP, Richter SS, Gilligan PH, Thomson RB, et al. A guide to utilization of the microbiology laboratory for diagnosis of infectious diseases: 2013 recommendations by the Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and the American Society for Microbiology (ASM)(a). Clin Infect Dis. 2013;57(4):e22–121.
doi: 10.1093/cid/cit278
pubmed: 23845951