Cargando…
Is combining serum interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein a reliable diagnostic tool in periprosthetic joint infections?
BACKGROUND: Because there is no single gold standard method for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), the combination of valuable methods to evaluate infection appears to achieve a better diagnostic result. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of s...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7532114/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33008442 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-01864-7 |
_version_ | 1783589857146175488 |
---|---|
author | Li, Cheng Ojeda Thies, Christina Xu, Chi Trampuz, Andrej |
author_facet | Li, Cheng Ojeda Thies, Christina Xu, Chi Trampuz, Andrej |
author_sort | Li, Cheng |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Because there is no single gold standard method for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), the combination of valuable methods to evaluate infection appears to achieve a better diagnostic result. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of serum interleukin (IL)-6 and C-reactive protein (CRP) for the diagnosis of PJI. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science databases were searched for articles describing PJI diagnosis using serum IL-6 and CRP published between January 1990 and December 2019. RESULTS: Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity was 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80−0.88) for the combined method (serum IL-6 and CRP) in series and parallel approaches, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.82−0.90) for IL-6, and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.79−0.88) for CRP. The pooled specificity was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.82−0.88) for the combined method, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79−0.87) for IL-6, and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79−0.87) for CRP. The combined method had the highest value for the area under the curve (0.9453), followed by IL-6 (0.9237) and CRP (0.9074). Subgroup analyses showed that the sensitivity of the combined method in parallel tests was higher than that in IL-6 or CRP (94% vs. 89% and 84%, respectively). Serial testing of the combined method showed increased specificity compared to a single indicator (96% vs. 83% and 80%). CONCLUSION: The combination of serum IL-6 and CRP was a reliable tool for the diagnosis of periprosthetic hip and knee infection, demonstrating a better diagnostic accuracy than single marker analysis. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7532114 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-75321142020-10-05 Is combining serum interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein a reliable diagnostic tool in periprosthetic joint infections? Li, Cheng Ojeda Thies, Christina Xu, Chi Trampuz, Andrej J Orthop Surg Res Research Article BACKGROUND: Because there is no single gold standard method for the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), the combination of valuable methods to evaluate infection appears to achieve a better diagnostic result. The objective of the present study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of serum interleukin (IL)-6 and C-reactive protein (CRP) for the diagnosis of PJI. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science databases were searched for articles describing PJI diagnosis using serum IL-6 and CRP published between January 1990 and December 2019. RESULTS: Eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity was 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.80−0.88) for the combined method (serum IL-6 and CRP) in series and parallel approaches, 0.87 (95% CI, 0.82−0.90) for IL-6, and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.79−0.88) for CRP. The pooled specificity was 0.85 (95% CI, 0.82−0.88) for the combined method, 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79−0.87) for IL-6, and 0.83 (95% CI, 0.79−0.87) for CRP. The combined method had the highest value for the area under the curve (0.9453), followed by IL-6 (0.9237) and CRP (0.9074). Subgroup analyses showed that the sensitivity of the combined method in parallel tests was higher than that in IL-6 or CRP (94% vs. 89% and 84%, respectively). Serial testing of the combined method showed increased specificity compared to a single indicator (96% vs. 83% and 80%). CONCLUSION: The combination of serum IL-6 and CRP was a reliable tool for the diagnosis of periprosthetic hip and knee infection, demonstrating a better diagnostic accuracy than single marker analysis. BioMed Central 2020-10-02 /pmc/articles/PMC7532114/ /pubmed/33008442 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-01864-7 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Li, Cheng Ojeda Thies, Christina Xu, Chi Trampuz, Andrej Is combining serum interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein a reliable diagnostic tool in periprosthetic joint infections? |
title | Is combining serum interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein a reliable diagnostic tool in periprosthetic joint infections? |
title_full | Is combining serum interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein a reliable diagnostic tool in periprosthetic joint infections? |
title_fullStr | Is combining serum interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein a reliable diagnostic tool in periprosthetic joint infections? |
title_full_unstemmed | Is combining serum interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein a reliable diagnostic tool in periprosthetic joint infections? |
title_short | Is combining serum interleukin-6 and C-reactive protein a reliable diagnostic tool in periprosthetic joint infections? |
title_sort | is combining serum interleukin-6 and c-reactive protein a reliable diagnostic tool in periprosthetic joint infections? |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7532114/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33008442 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13018-020-01864-7 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT licheng iscombiningseruminterleukin6andcreactiveproteinareliablediagnostictoolinperiprostheticjointinfections AT ojedathieschristina iscombiningseruminterleukin6andcreactiveproteinareliablediagnostictoolinperiprostheticjointinfections AT xuchi iscombiningseruminterleukin6andcreactiveproteinareliablediagnostictoolinperiprostheticjointinfections AT trampuzandrej iscombiningseruminterleukin6andcreactiveproteinareliablediagnostictoolinperiprostheticjointinfections |