Erratum to: What is the Accuracy of Nuclear Imaging in the Assessment of Periprosthetic Knee Infection? A Meta-analysis.

Abstract

Erratum to: Clin Orthop Relat Res DOI 10.1007/s11999-016-5218-0 In the published study, “What is the Accuracy of Nuclear Imaging in the Assessment of Periprosthetic Knee Infection? A Meta-analysis” several errors can be found throughout the manuscript. In Table 1, the column title, “Number of hip prostheses (total/infected)” should be: “Number of knee prostheses (total/infected).” In Table 2, the column title, “Hip prostheses (primary/revision)” should be: “Knee prostheses (primary/revision).” In the legend for Table 2, “H = hybrid hip prostheses” should be removed. In the Discussion section, Figure 5A-B is incorrect as published. The corrected Fig. 5A-B is shown in this erratum.Fig. 5A-B: The pooled (A) sensitivity and (B) specificity of leukocyte scintigraphy in the assessment of periprosthetic knee infection with 95% CIs are shownThe title of Table 14 is incorrect. The title should be: “Diagnostic accuracy of fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography for detection of periprosthetic knee infection.” The title of Table 15 is incorrect. The title should be: “Study characteristics of fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography for detection of periprosthetic knee infection.” Additionally, Figure 8A-B is incorrect as published. The corrected Fig. 8A-B is shown in this erratum. The authors apologize for the errors.Fig. 8A-B: The pooled (A) sensitivity and (B) specificity of FDG-PET in the assessment of periprosthetic knee infection with 95% CIs are shown. FDG-PET = fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography.