Direct detection and identification of periprosthetic joint infection pathogens by metagenomic next-generation sequencing

This study assessed the application of metagenomic next-generation sequencing in pathogen detection of periprosthetic joint infections. A total of 95 cases who previously had undergone hip and knee replacement undergoing revision from January 2018 to January 2021 were included in this study. Specimens of synovial fluid and deep-tissue were collected for culture and metagenomic next-generation sequencing, and patients were retrospectively categorized as infected or aseptic using the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria after revision surgery. The sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values were compared. A total of 36 cases had positive culture results and 59 cases had positive metagenomic next-generation sequencing results. Culture was positive in 34 infected cases (58.6%) and 2 aseptic cases (5.4%). Metagenomic next-generation sequencing was positive in 55 infected cases (94.8%) and 4 aseptic cases (10.8%). Five cases diagnosed with infection had other potential pathogens detected by metagenomic next-generation sequencing. Among the 24 culture-negative periprosthetic joint infections, metagenomic next-generation sequencing was able to identify potential pathogens in 21 cases (87.5%). From sampling to reporting, the average time needed for culture was 5.2 (95% CI 3.1-7.3) days, while that for metagenomic next-generation sequencing was 1.3 (95% CI 0.9-1.7) days. Metagenomic next-generation sequencing is more advantageous in pathogen detection of periprosthetic joint infection after total joint replacement, especially in patients with multiple infections or negative culture results.

Automated summary

This study evaluated the use of metagenomic next-generation sequencing for pathogen detection in periprosthetic joint infections. Samples from 95 patients who had undergone revision surgery for hip and knee replacement were analyzed. Culture and metagenomic next-generation sequencing were used to detect pathogens, and the sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values were compared. The results showed that metagenomic next-generation sequencing had a higher detection rate than culture, especially in cases with multiple infections or negative culture results.