BioFire 关节感染面板在诊断常规微生物学结果不明确的髋关节和膝关节周围感染患者中的作用。

IF 4.7 2区 医学 Q2 CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING
Susana Gardete-Hartmann, Jennyfer A Mitterer, Sujeesh Sebastian, Bernhard J H Frank, Sebastian Simon, Stephanie Huber, Marcellino Löw, Ian Sommer, Morjan Prinz, Milo Halabi, Jochen G Hofstaetter
{"title":"BioFire 关节感染面板在诊断常规微生物学结果不明确的髋关节和膝关节周围感染患者中的作用。","authors":"Susana Gardete-Hartmann, Jennyfer A Mitterer, Sujeesh Sebastian, Bernhard J H Frank, Sebastian Simon, Stephanie Huber, Marcellino Löw, Ian Sommer, Morjan Prinz, Milo Halabi, Jochen G Hofstaetter","doi":"10.1302/2046-3758.137.BJR-2023-0321.R2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the BioFire Joint Infection (JI) Panel in cases of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) where conventional microbiology is unclear, and to assess its role as a complementary intraoperative diagnostic tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five groups representing common microbiological scenarios in hip and knee revision arthroplasty were selected from our arthroplasty registry, prospectively maintained PJI databases, and biobank: 1) unexpected-negative cultures (UNCs), 2) unexpected-positive cultures (UPCs), 3) single-positive intraoperative cultures (SPCs), and 4) clearly septic and 5) aseptic cases. In total, 268 archived synovial fluid samples from 195 patients who underwent acute/chronic revision total hip or knee arthroplasty were included. Cases were classified according to the International Consensus Meeting 2018 criteria. JI panel evaluation of synovial fluid was performed, and the results were compared with cultures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The JI panel detected microorganisms in 7/48 (14.5%) and 15/67 (22.4%) cases related to UNCs and SPCs, respectively, but not in cases of UPCs. The correlation between JI panel detection and infection classification criteria for early/late acute and chronic PJI was 46.6%, 73%, and 40%, respectively. Overall, the JI panel identified 12.6% additional microorganisms and three new species. The JI panel pathogen identification showed a sensitivity and specificity of 41.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 33.7 to 49.5) and 91.1% (95% CI 84.7 to 94.9), respectively. In total, 19/195 (9.7%) could have been managed differently and more accurately upon JI panel evaluation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite its microbial limitation, JI panel demonstrated clinical usefulness by complementing the traditional methods based on multiple cultures, particularly in PJI with unclear microbiological results.</p>","PeriodicalId":9074,"journal":{"name":"Bone & Joint Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11233181/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The role of BioFire Joint Infection Panel in diagnosing periprosthetic hip and knee joint infections in patients with unclear conventional microbiological results.\",\"authors\":\"Susana Gardete-Hartmann, Jennyfer A Mitterer, Sujeesh Sebastian, Bernhard J H Frank, Sebastian Simon, Stephanie Huber, Marcellino Löw, Ian Sommer, Morjan Prinz, Milo Halabi, Jochen G Hofstaetter\",\"doi\":\"10.1302/2046-3758.137.BJR-2023-0321.R2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Aims: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the BioFire Joint Infection (JI) Panel in cases of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) where conventional microbiology is unclear, and to assess its role as a complementary intraoperative diagnostic tool.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Five groups representing common microbiological scenarios in hip and knee revision arthroplasty were selected from our arthroplasty registry, prospectively maintained PJI databases, and biobank: 1) unexpected-negative cultures (UNCs), 2) unexpected-positive cultures (UPCs), 3) single-positive intraoperative cultures (SPCs), and 4) clearly septic and 5) aseptic cases. In total, 268 archived synovial fluid samples from 195 patients who underwent acute/chronic revision total hip or knee arthroplasty were included. Cases were classified according to the International Consensus Meeting 2018 criteria. JI panel evaluation of synovial fluid was performed, and the results were compared with cultures.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The JI panel detected microorganisms in 7/48 (14.5%) and 15/67 (22.4%) cases related to UNCs and SPCs, respectively, but not in cases of UPCs. The correlation between JI panel detection and infection classification criteria for early/late acute and chronic PJI was 46.6%, 73%, and 40%, respectively. Overall, the JI panel identified 12.6% additional microorganisms and three new species. The JI panel pathogen identification showed a sensitivity and specificity of 41.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 33.7 to 49.5) and 91.1% (95% CI 84.7 to 94.9), respectively. In total, 19/195 (9.7%) could have been managed differently and more accurately upon JI panel evaluation.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite its microbial limitation, JI panel demonstrated clinical usefulness by complementing the traditional methods based on multiple cultures, particularly in PJI with unclear microbiological results.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9074,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bone & Joint Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-10\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11233181/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bone & Joint Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.137.BJR-2023-0321.R2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bone & Joint Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.137.BJR-2023-0321.R2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:本研究旨在评估 BioFire 关节感染(JI)面板在传统微生物学尚不明确的髋关节和膝关节假体周围感染(PJI)病例中的作用,并评估其作为术中诊断辅助工具的作用:方法: 从我们的关节成形术登记处、前瞻性维护的 PJI 数据库和生物库中选取了代表髋关节和膝关节翻修成形术中常见微生物情况的五组:1)意外阴性培养物(UNC);2)意外阳性培养物(UPC);3)术中单次阳性培养物(SPC);4)明显败血症病例;5)无菌病例。共纳入了 195 名接受急性/慢性翻修全髋关节或膝关节置换术患者的 268 份存档滑膜液样本。病例按照 2018 年国际共识会议标准进行分类。对滑膜液进行JI小组评估,并将结果与培养结果进行比较:JI小组分别在7/48(14.5%)和15/67(22.4%)例与UNCs和SPCs相关的病例中检测到微生物,但未在UPCs病例中检测到微生物。JI 小组的检测结果与早期/晚期急性和慢性 PJI 的感染分类标准之间的相关性分别为 46.6%、73% 和 40%。总体而言,JI 面板鉴定出了 12.6% 的额外微生物和三个新物种。JI 小组病原体鉴定的敏感性和特异性分别为 41.4%(95% 置信区间 (CI) 33.7 至 49.5)和 91.1%(95% 置信区间 (CI) 84.7 至 94.9)。总计有 19/195 例(9.7%)患者在接受 JI 小组评估后可以得到更准确的不同处理:尽管存在微生物方面的局限性,但 JI 面板通过对基于多重培养的传统方法进行补充,展示了其临床实用性,尤其是在微生物学结果不明确的 PJI 中。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The role of BioFire Joint Infection Panel in diagnosing periprosthetic hip and knee joint infections in patients with unclear conventional microbiological results.

Aims: This study aimed to evaluate the BioFire Joint Infection (JI) Panel in cases of hip and knee periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) where conventional microbiology is unclear, and to assess its role as a complementary intraoperative diagnostic tool.

Methods: Five groups representing common microbiological scenarios in hip and knee revision arthroplasty were selected from our arthroplasty registry, prospectively maintained PJI databases, and biobank: 1) unexpected-negative cultures (UNCs), 2) unexpected-positive cultures (UPCs), 3) single-positive intraoperative cultures (SPCs), and 4) clearly septic and 5) aseptic cases. In total, 268 archived synovial fluid samples from 195 patients who underwent acute/chronic revision total hip or knee arthroplasty were included. Cases were classified according to the International Consensus Meeting 2018 criteria. JI panel evaluation of synovial fluid was performed, and the results were compared with cultures.

Results: The JI panel detected microorganisms in 7/48 (14.5%) and 15/67 (22.4%) cases related to UNCs and SPCs, respectively, but not in cases of UPCs. The correlation between JI panel detection and infection classification criteria for early/late acute and chronic PJI was 46.6%, 73%, and 40%, respectively. Overall, the JI panel identified 12.6% additional microorganisms and three new species. The JI panel pathogen identification showed a sensitivity and specificity of 41.4% (95% confidence interval (CI) 33.7 to 49.5) and 91.1% (95% CI 84.7 to 94.9), respectively. In total, 19/195 (9.7%) could have been managed differently and more accurately upon JI panel evaluation.

Conclusion: Despite its microbial limitation, JI panel demonstrated clinical usefulness by complementing the traditional methods based on multiple cultures, particularly in PJI with unclear microbiological results.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Bone & Joint Research
Bone & Joint Research CELL & TISSUE ENGINEERING-ORTHOPEDICS
CiteScore
7.40
自引率
23.90%
发文量
156
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: The gold open access journal for the musculoskeletal sciences. Included in PubMed and available in PubMed Central.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信