<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!DOCTYPE root>
<article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/" article-type="other" dtd-version="1.2" xml:lang="en"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title xml:lang="en">Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia</journal-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Травматология и ортопедия России</trans-title></trans-title-group></journal-title-group><issn publication-format="print">2311-2905</issn><issn publication-format="electronic">2542-0933</issn><publisher><publisher-name xml:lang="en">Vreden National Medical Research Center of Traumatology and Orthopedics</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">1320</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.21823/2311-2905-2019-25-4-56-63</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="en"><subject>CLINICAL STUDIES</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="ru"><subject>КЛИНИЧЕСКИЕ ИССЛЕДОВАНИЯ</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="toc-heading" xml:lang="zh"><subject>Clinical studies</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="article-type"><subject></subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title xml:lang="en">New Methods in the Diagnosis of Prosthetic Joint Infection</article-title><trans-title-group xml:lang="ru"><trans-title>Новые методы диагностики перипротезной инфекции</trans-title></trans-title-group></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Karbysheva</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Карбышева</surname><given-names>С.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="DE">Germany</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Svetlana Karbysheva — Clinical Microbiologist</p><p>Berlin</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Clinical Microbiologist</p><p>Берлин</p></bio><email>svetlana.karbysheva@charite.de</email><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Renz</surname><given-names>N.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Ренц</surname><given-names>Н.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="DE">Germany</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Nora Renz — Infection Disease Specialist</p><p>Berlin</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Infection Disease Specialist</p><p>Берлин</p></bio><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Yermak</surname><given-names>K.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Ермак</surname><given-names>К.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="DE">Germany</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Katsiaryna Yermak — Research Fellow</p><p>Berlin</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Research Fellow</p><p>Берлин</p></bio><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Cabric</surname><given-names>S.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Кабрик</surname><given-names>С.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="DE">Germany</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Sabrina Cabric — Research Fellow</p><p>Berlin</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Research Fellow</p><p>Берлин</p></bio><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author"><name-alternatives><name xml:lang="en"><surname>Trampuz</surname><given-names>A.</given-names></name><name xml:lang="ru"><surname>Трампуш</surname><given-names>А.</given-names></name></name-alternatives><address><country country="DE">Germany</country></address><bio xml:lang="en"><p>Trampuz Andrej — Head; Research Group Leader of the Biofilm Research Laboratory</p><p>Berlin</p></bio><bio xml:lang="ru"><p>Head; Research Group Leader of the Biofilm Research Laboratory</p><p>Берлин</p></bio><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"/></contrib></contrib-group><aff-alternatives id="aff1"><aff><institution xml:lang="en">Center for Septic Surgery, Charité — University Medicine Berlin</institution></aff><aff><institution xml:lang="ru">Центр костно-мышечной хирургии Шарите — Университетский медицинский комплекс Берлина</institution></aff></aff-alternatives><pub-date date-type="pub" iso-8601-date="2019-12-23" publication-format="electronic"><day>23</day><month>12</month><year>2019</year></pub-date><volume>25</volume><issue>4</issue><issue-title xml:lang="en"/><issue-title xml:lang="ru"/><fpage>56</fpage><lpage>63</lpage><history><date date-type="received" iso-8601-date="2019-11-06"><day>06</day><month>11</month><year>2019</year></date><date date-type="accepted" iso-8601-date="2019-11-06"><day>06</day><month>11</month><year>2019</year></date></history><permissions><ali:free_to_read xmlns:ali="http://www.niso.org/schemas/ali/1.0/"/></permissions><self-uri xlink:href="https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1320">https://journal.rniito.org/jour/article/view/1320</self-uri><abstract xml:lang="en"><p>A timely and accurate diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is crucial to plan adequate treatment. <bold>Purpose of the study</bold>. To evaluate the performance of new diagnostic tests for the diagnosis of PJI. <bold>Material </bold><bold>and Methods</bold>. The performance of novel biomarkers in synovial fluid (i.e. D-lactate and alfa-defensin), molecular test (i.e. PCR of synovial fluid and sonication fluid), new methods to dislodge biofilm from implant surface (i.e. MicroDTTect) and sonication of explanted prosthesis were investigated in patients with PJI and aseptic loosening of the prosthesis. <bold>Results</bold>. D-lactate showed better sensitivity for the diagnosis of PJI compared to leukocyte count (86% and 80%, respectively). The optimal D-lactate cut-off value was calculated at 1.26 mmol/l. The ADLF test showed sensitivity of 84%, 67% and to 54% depending on classification criteria used for the diagnosis of PJI (Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS), The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) and proposed European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS) criteria, respectively). Using the proposed EBJIS definition criteria, the sensitivity of the leukocyte count was significantly higher than that of the ADLF test (86% compared with 54%; p&lt;0,001), particularly in chronic PJI (81% compared with 44%, respectively; p&lt;0,001). The sensitivity of synovial fluid PCR was 60% and herewith comparable with synovial fluid culture (52%, p = 0,239). The sensitivity and specificity of sonication fluid culture were 58% and 100%, which was comparable to sonication fluid PCR 51% and 94%, respectively. DTT-based method showed low sensitivity for diagnosis of PJI (40%) compared to sonication (80%, p&lt;0,01). <bold>Conclusion</bold>. Synovial fluid D-lactate demonstrated good analytical performance and diagnostic value for the diagnosis of PJI. In particular, the high sensitivity for diagnosing infection and rapid availability of the test result make synovial fluid D-lactate suitable as screening test, whereas ADLF had limited sensitivity (54%) but high specificity (&gt;95%) and it should therefore not be used for screening, but rather as a confirmatory test for PJI. Multiplex PCR of synovial fluid and sonication fluid has similar sensitivity and specificity compared to synovial fluid culture, having the advantage of rapid availability of results (within 5 hours) and fully automated process. With further improvement of its performance and inclusion of additional primers, multiplex PCR may complement conventional cultures, especially for rapid and accurate diagnosis of low-grade PJI. Culture of samples obtained by sonication of prostheses showed better sensitivity for the microbiologic diagnosis of prosthetic hip and knee infection compared to chemical based dislodgement such as MicroDTTect.</p></abstract><trans-abstract xml:lang="ru"><p><bold>Актуальность.</bold> Своевременная и точная диагностика перипротезной инфекции суставов (ППИ) имеет решающее значение для планирования соответствующей тактики лечения. <bold>Цель исследования</bold> — оценить эффективность новых диагностических тестов для диагностики перипротезной инфекции суставов. <bold>Материал и методы.</bold> Эффективность новых биомаркеров в синовиальной жидкости (D-лактат и альфа-дефенсин), ПЦР синовиальной жидкости и соникационной жидкости, новые методы разрушения бактериальных биопленок на поверхности имплантата таких как MicroDTTect и ультразвуковая обработка извлеченных имплантатов были исследованы у пациентов с ППИ и асептическим расшатыванием эндопротеза. <bold>Результаты</bold>. D-лактат синовиальной жидкости показал более высокую чувствительность для диагностики ППИ в сравнении с определением количества лейкоцитов в синовиальной жидкости (86% и 80%, соответственно). Пороговая концентрация D-лактата составила 1,26 ммоль/л. Чувствительность альфа-дефенсина составила 84%, 67% и 54%, в зависимости от диагностических критериев ППИ (Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS), The Infectious Diseases Society of America (IDSA) и предложенные критерии European Bone and Joint Infection Society (EBJIS), соответственно). Однако применяя критерии постановки диагноза EBJIS, чувствительность определения лейкоцитов была значительно выше, в сравнении с альфа-дефензином (86% и 54%, p&lt;0,001), особенно при хронической ППИ (81% и 44% соответственно; p&lt;0,001). Чувствительность мультиплексной ПЦР синовиальной жидкости составила 60% и при этом была сопоставима с культуральным исследованием синовиальной жидкости (52%, р = 0,239). Чувствительность и специфичность культурального исследования ультразвуковой жидкости составили 58% и 100% и были сопоставимы с ПЦР исследованием соникационной жидкости — 51% и 94% соответственно. Метод разрушения биопленок на поверхности имплантатов на основе дитиотреитиола (DTT) показал низкую чувствительность для диагностики ППИ (40%) по сравнению с соникацией (p&lt;0,01).<bold> Заключение.</bold> D-лактат синовиальной жидкости продемонстрировал хорошие аналитические характеристики и диагностическую значимость для диагностики ППИ. В частности, высокая чувствительность и быстрота получения результата делают целесообзазным использовать D-лактат в качестве скринингового теста. Альфа-дефенсин обладает ограниченной чувствительностью (54%), но высокой специфичностью (&gt;95%), поэтому его следует рассматривать скорее как подтверждающий тест. Мультиплексная ПЦР синовиальной и соникационной жидкости имеет сходную чувствительность и специфичность по сравнению с культуральным исследованием. Преимущество использования основано на более быстром получении результата исследования и полной автоматизации процесса. При дальнейшем улучшении диагностических характеристик, например включении дополнительных праймеров, мультиплексная ПЦР может дополнять рутинное микробиологическое исследование, особенно в случаях хронической ППИ. Микробиологическое исследование соникационной жидкости извлеченных имплантатов, показало более высокую чувствительность по сравнению с тестом MicroDTTect. </p></trans-abstract><kwd-group xml:lang="en"><kwd>diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection</kwd><kwd>biofilms</kwd><kwd>synovial fluid</kwd><kwd>novel diagnostic tests</kwd></kwd-group><kwd-group xml:lang="ru"><kwd>диагностика перипротезной инфекции</kwd><kwd>новые методы диагностики</kwd></kwd-group><funding-group><funding-statement xml:lang="en">no funding or sponsorship was received for this study or publication of this article.</funding-statement></funding-group></article-meta></front><body></body><back><ref-list><ref id="B1"><label>1.</label><mixed-citation>1. Kaandorp C.J., Dinant H.J., van de Laar M.A., Moens H.J., Prins A.P., Dijkmans B.A. Incidence and sources of native and prosthetic joint infection: a community based prospective survey. Ann Rheum Dis. 1997;56(8):470-475. doi: 10.1136/ard.56.8.470.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B2"><label>2.</label><mixed-citation>2. Portillo M.E., Salvadó M., Alier A., Sorli L., Martínez S., Horcajada J.P., Puig L. Prosthesis failure within 2 years of implantation is highly predictive of infection. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2013;471(11):3672-3678. doi: 10.1007/s11999-013-3200-7.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B3"><label>3.</label><mixed-citation>3. Corvec S., Portillo M.E., Pasticci B.M., Borens O., Trampuz A. Epidemiology and new developments in the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection. Int J Artif Organs. 2012;35(10):923-934. doi: 10.5301/ijao.5000168.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B4"><label>4.</label><mixed-citation>4. Winkler T., Trampuz A., Renz N., Perka C., Bozhkova S. [Classification and algorithm for diagnosis and treatment of hip prosthetic joint infection]. Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii [Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia]. 2016;(1):21-32. (In Russian).</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B5"><label>5.</label><mixed-citation>5. Berbari E.F., Marculescu C., Sia I., Lahr B.D., Hanssen A.D., Steckelberg J.M. et al. Culture-negative prosthetic joint infection. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;45(9):1113-1119. doi: 10.1086/522184.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B6"><label>6.</label><mixed-citation>6. Abdullah S., Young-Min S.A., Hudson S.J., Kelly C.A., Heycock C.R., Hamilton J.D. Gross synovial fluid analysis in the differential diagnosis of joint effusion. J Clin Pathol. 2007;60(10):1144-1147.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B7"><label>7.</label><mixed-citation>7. Sharff K.A., Richards E.P., Townes J.M. Clinical management of septic arthritis. Curr Rheumatol Rep. 2013;15(6):332. doi: 10.1007/s11926-013-0332-4.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B8"><label>8.</label><mixed-citation>8. Karbysheva S.B., Grigoricheva L.G., Zhyltsov I.V., Semenov V.M., Zolovkina A.G., Veremei I.S., Trampuz A. [Synovial Fluid D-lactate — Bacterial-Specific Marker for Infection of Native and Prosthetic Joints]. Travmatologiya i ortopediya Rossii [Traumatology and Orthopedics of Russia]. 2017;23(2):6-14. (In Russian). doi: 10.21823/2311-2905-2017-23-2-6-14.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B9"><label>9.</label><mixed-citation>9. Gratacos J., Vila J., Moya F., Marcos M.A., Collado A., Sanmarti R. et al. D-lactic acid in synovial fluid. A rapid diagnostic test for bacterial synovitis. J Rheumatol. 1995;22:1504-1508.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B10"><label>10.</label><mixed-citation>10. Yermak K., Karbysheva S., Perka C., Trampuz A., Renz N. Performance of synovial fluid D-lactate for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection: A prospective observational study. J Infect. 2019;79(2):123-129. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2019.05.015.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B11"><label>11.</label><mixed-citation>11. Holinka J., Bauer L., Hirschl A.M., Graninger W., Windhager R., Presterl E. Sonication cultures of explanted components as an add-on test to routinely conducted microbiological diagnostics improve pathogen detection. J Orthop Res. 2011;29(4):617-622. doi: 10.1002/jor.21286.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B12"><label>12.</label><mixed-citation>13. Zimmerli W., Trampuz A. Implant-Associated Infection. In: Bjarnsholt T., Jensen P.Ø., Moser C., Høiby N., ed. Biofilm Infections. NY: Springer New York; 2011:69-90.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B13"><label>13.</label><mixed-citation>13. Kobayashi H., Oethinger M., Tuohy M.J., Procop G.W., Bauer T.W. Improved detection of biofilm-formative bacteria by vortexing and sonication: a pilot study. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467(5):1360-1364. doi: 10.1007/s11999-008-0609-5.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B14"><label>14.</label><mixed-citation>14. Scheijen J.L., Hanssen N.M., van de Waarenburg M.P., Jonkers D.M., Stehouwer C.D., Schalkwijk C.G. L(+) and D(-) lactate are increased in plasma and urine samples of type 2 diabetes as measured by a simultaneous quantification of L(+) and D(-) lactate by reversed-phase liquid chromatography tandem mass spectrometry. Exp Diabetes Res. 2012;2012:234812. doi: 10.1155/2012/234812.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B15"><label>15.</label><mixed-citation>15. Kasparek M.F., Kasparek M., Boettner F., Faschingbauer M., Hahne J., Dominkus M. Intraoperative Diagnosis of Periprosthetic Joint Infection Using a Novel Alpha-Defensin Lateral Flow Assay. J Arthroplasty. 2016;31(12):2871-2874. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2016.05.033.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B16"><label>16.</label><mixed-citation>16. Parvizi J., Gehrke T.; International Consensus Group on Periprosthetic Joint Infection. Definition of periprosthetic joint infection. J Arthroplasty. 2014;29(7):1331. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2014.03.009.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B17"><label>17.</label><mixed-citation>17. Parvizi J., Gehrke T., Chen A.F. Proceedings of the International Consensus on Periprosthetic Joint Infection. Bone Joint J. 2013;95-B(11):1450-1452. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.95B11.33135.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B18"><label>18.</label><mixed-citation>18. Parvizi J., Tan T.L., Goswami K., Higuera C., Della Valle C., Chen A.F., Shohat N. The 2018 Definition of Periprosthetic Hip and Knee Infection: An Evidence-Based and Validated Criteria. J Arthroplasty. 2018;33(5):1309-1314.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2018.02.078.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B19"><label>19.</label><mixed-citation>19. Parvizi J., Zmistowski B., Berbari E.F., Bauer T.W., Springer B.D., Della Valle C.J. et al. New definition for periprosthetic joint infection: from the Workgroup of the Musculoskeletal Infection Society. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2011;469(11):2992-2994. doi: 10.1007/s11999-011-2102-9.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B20"><label>20.</label><mixed-citation>20. Sigmund I.K., Holinka J., Gamper J., Staats K., Böhler C., Kubista B., Windhager R. Qualitative α-defensin test (Synovasure) for the diagnosis of periprosthetic infection in revision total joint arthroplasty. Bone Joint J. 2017;99-B(1):66-72. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.99B1.BJJ-2016-0295.R1.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B21"><label>21.</label><mixed-citation>21. Hall-Stoodley L., Costerton J.W., Stoodley P. Bacterial biofilms: from the natural environment to infectious diseases. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004;2(2):95-108. doi: 10.1038/nrmicro821.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B22"><label>22.</label><mixed-citation>22. Portillo M.E., Salvadó M., Alier A., Martínez S., Sorli L., Horcajada J.P., Puig L. Advantages of sonication fluid culture for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection. J Infect. 2014;69(1):35-41. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2014.03.002.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B23"><label>23.</label><mixed-citation>23. Portillo M.E., Salvadó M., Trampuz A., Siverio A., Alier A., Sorli L. et al. Improved diagnosis of orthopedic implant-associated infection by inoculation of sonication fluid into blood culture bottles. J Clin Microbiol. 2015;53(5):1622-1627. doi: 10.1128/JCM.03683-14.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B24"><label>24.</label><mixed-citation>24. Tande A.J., Patel R. Prosthetic joint infection. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2014;27:302-345. doi: 10.1128/CMR.00111-13.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="B25"><label>25.</label><mixed-citation>25. Drago L., Signori V., De Vecchi E., Vassena C., Palazzi E., Cappelletti L. et al. Use of dithiothreitol to improve the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections. J Orthop Res. 2013;31(11):1694-1699. doi: 10.1002/jor.22423.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>
