Abstract

BackgroundIn fracture-related infections (FRI), both the diagnosis of the infection and the identification of the causative pathogen are crucial to optimize treatment outcomes. Sonication has been successfully used for periprosthetic joint infections (PJI); however, its role in FRI remains unknown. Our aim was to determine the diagnostic accuracy (sensitivity, specificity) of sonicate fluid culture (SFC). The primary objective was to compare SFC with peri-implant tissue culture (PTC) overall and among subgroups using the consensus definition by Metsemakers et al. The secondary objective was to determine the yield of SFC in possible fracture-related infections (PFRI).MethodsFrom March 2017 to May 2019, 230 cases of retrieved implants were retrospectively reviewed. To perform sonication, explants were placed in sterile polypropylene jars intraoperatively. After treatment in an ultrasonic bath (Bandelin, Berlin, Germany), sonicate fluid was incubated into blood culture bottles, and conventional culturing was eventually performed. Sensitivity and specificity were determined using two-by-two contingency tables. McNemar’s test was used to compare proportions among paired samples while Fisher’s exact test was used for comparison between categorical variables.ResultsOf the 230 cases, 107 were identified as FRI, whereas 123 were aseptic revision cases (ARC). Of the latter, 105 were labeled as PFRI. Sensitivity of SFC was higher in comparison with PTC, although this did not reach statistical significance (90.7% vs. 84.1%; p = .065). The specificity of SFC was significantly lower than that of PTC (73.2% vs. 88.6%; p = .003). In PFRI, SFC yielded significantly more positive results than PTC (33/105 vs. 14/105; p = .003). Overall, 142 pathogens were identified by SFC, whereas 131 pathogens were found by PTC.ConclusionsWe found that sonication of fracture fixation devices may be a useful adjunct in FRI, especially in “low-grade” infections lacking confirmatory clinical criteria. Standardized diagnostic protocols are warranted in order to further optimize the diagnostic accuracy.

Highlights

  • In fracture-related infections (FRI), both the diagnosis of the infection and the identification of the causative pathogen are crucial to optimize treatment outcomes

  • A consensus definition was implemented by an expert group comprising scientific and medical organizations with the support of the AO Foundation [8]

  • The secondary objective was to determine the yield of sonicate fluid culture (SFC) in comparison with peri-implant tissue culture (PTC) in possible fracture-related infections (PFRI)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In fracture-related infections (FRI), both the diagnosis of the infection and the identification of the causative pathogen are crucial to optimize treatment outcomes. The primary objective was to compare SFC with peri-implant tissue culture (PTC) overall and among subgroups using the consensus definition by Metsemakers et al The secondary objective was to determine the yield of SFC in possible fracture-related infections (PFRI). Fracture-related infections (FRI) pose a major clinical challenge and may have devastating consequences, including non-union, multiple revision surgeries, or even amputation. Infections may be clinically apparent, but they may be associated with subtle signs such as chronic pain, non-union or implant loosening in radiographs. One of the reasons might be the biofilm formation which is associated with medical implants. A consensus definition was implemented by an expert group comprising scientific and medical organizations with the support of the AO Foundation [8]

Objectives
Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call