4.7 Article

Long Pentraxin 3 as a New Biomarker for Diagnosis of Hip and Knee Periprosthetic Joint Infections

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL MEDICINE
卷 12, 期 3, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12031055

关键词

periprosthetic joint infections; hip; knee; pentraxin 3; biomarkers

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the diagnostic potential of synovial and plasmatic PTX3 in hip and knee periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs). The results showed that synovial PTX3 had high sensitivity and specificity in diagnosing PJI, while plasmatic PTX3 failed to differentiate infected from non-infected patients.
Background: Preoperative diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) poses an unmet clinical challenge. The long pentraxin PTX3 is a component of the innate immune system involved in infection immunity. This study evaluated the potential of synovial and plasmatic PTX3 in the diagnosis of hip and knee PJIs. Methods: Consecutive total hip and knee arthroplasty (THA/TKA) revisions were prospectively included and classified as septic or aseptic according to the European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) and Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria. The concentration of PTX3 in plasma and synovial fluid samples was measured with ELISA. The AUC, threshold value, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative likelihood ratios were calculated using the ROC (receiver operating characteristic) curve method. Results: The study population included 128 patients (94 THAs; 34 TKAs). The AUC of the synovial PTX3 based on EBJIS criteria was 0.85 (p < 0.0001), with a sensitivity of 81.13% and a specificity of 93.33%. The AUC based on MSIS criteria was 0.95 (p < 0.001), with a sensitivity of 91.43% and a specificity of 89.25%. Plasmatic PTX3 failed to discriminate infected from non-infected patients. Conclusions: Synovial PTX3 demonstrated an excellent diagnostic potential in hip and knee PJIs, with a very high specificity irrespective of the diagnostic criteria for PJI.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据