Cargando…

Differences between infected and noninfected synovial fluid: an observational study using metabolic phenotyping (or “metabonomics")

AIMS: The diagnosis of joint infections is an inexact science using combinations of blood inflammatory markers and microscopy, culture, and sensitivity of synovial fluid (SF). There is potential for small molecule metabolites in infected SF to act as infection markers that could improve accuracy and...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Akhbari, Pouya, Jaggard, Matthew K., Boulangé, Claire L., Vaghela, Uddhav, Graça, Gonçalo, Bhattacharya, Rajarshi, Lindon, John C., Williams, Horace R. T., Gupte, Chinmay M.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7845460/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33502243
http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.101.BJR-2020-0285.R1
_version_ 1783644554814029824
author Akhbari, Pouya
Jaggard, Matthew K.
Boulangé, Claire L.
Vaghela, Uddhav
Graça, Gonçalo
Bhattacharya, Rajarshi
Lindon, John C.
Williams, Horace R. T.
Gupte, Chinmay M.
author_facet Akhbari, Pouya
Jaggard, Matthew K.
Boulangé, Claire L.
Vaghela, Uddhav
Graça, Gonçalo
Bhattacharya, Rajarshi
Lindon, John C.
Williams, Horace R. T.
Gupte, Chinmay M.
author_sort Akhbari, Pouya
collection PubMed
description AIMS: The diagnosis of joint infections is an inexact science using combinations of blood inflammatory markers and microscopy, culture, and sensitivity of synovial fluid (SF). There is potential for small molecule metabolites in infected SF to act as infection markers that could improve accuracy and speed of detection. The objective of this study was to use nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy to identify small molecule differences between infected and noninfected human SF. METHODS: In all, 16 SF samples (eight infected native and prosthetic joints plus eight noninfected joints requiring arthroplasty for end-stage osteoarthritis) were collected from patients. NMR spectroscopy was used to analyze the metabolites present in each sample. Principal component analysis and univariate statistical analysis were undertaken to investigate metabolic differences between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 16 metabolites were found in significantly different concentrations between the groups. Three were in higher relative concentrations (lipids, cholesterol, and N-acetylated molecules) and 13 in lower relative concentrations in the infected group (citrate, glycine, glycosaminoglycans, creatinine, histidine, lysine, formate, glucose, proline, valine, dimethylsulfone, mannose, and glutamine). CONCLUSION: Metabolites found in significantly greater concentrations in the infected cohort are markers of inflammation and infection. They play a role in lipid metabolism and the inflammatory response. Those found in significantly reduced concentrations were involved in carbohydrate metabolism, nucleoside metabolism, the glutamate metabolic pathway, increased oxidative stress in the diseased state, and reduced articular cartilage breakdown. This is the first study to demonstrate differences in the metabolic profile of infected and noninfected human SF, using a noninfected matched cohort, and may represent putative biomarkers that form the basis of new diagnostic tests for infected SF. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(1):85–95.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7845460
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78454602021-02-01 Differences between infected and noninfected synovial fluid: an observational study using metabolic phenotyping (or “metabonomics") Akhbari, Pouya Jaggard, Matthew K. Boulangé, Claire L. Vaghela, Uddhav Graça, Gonçalo Bhattacharya, Rajarshi Lindon, John C. Williams, Horace R. T. Gupte, Chinmay M. Bone Joint Res Synovium AIMS: The diagnosis of joint infections is an inexact science using combinations of blood inflammatory markers and microscopy, culture, and sensitivity of synovial fluid (SF). There is potential for small molecule metabolites in infected SF to act as infection markers that could improve accuracy and speed of detection. The objective of this study was to use nuclear magnetic resonance (NMR) spectroscopy to identify small molecule differences between infected and noninfected human SF. METHODS: In all, 16 SF samples (eight infected native and prosthetic joints plus eight noninfected joints requiring arthroplasty for end-stage osteoarthritis) were collected from patients. NMR spectroscopy was used to analyze the metabolites present in each sample. Principal component analysis and univariate statistical analysis were undertaken to investigate metabolic differences between the two groups. RESULTS: A total of 16 metabolites were found in significantly different concentrations between the groups. Three were in higher relative concentrations (lipids, cholesterol, and N-acetylated molecules) and 13 in lower relative concentrations in the infected group (citrate, glycine, glycosaminoglycans, creatinine, histidine, lysine, formate, glucose, proline, valine, dimethylsulfone, mannose, and glutamine). CONCLUSION: Metabolites found in significantly greater concentrations in the infected cohort are markers of inflammation and infection. They play a role in lipid metabolism and the inflammatory response. Those found in significantly reduced concentrations were involved in carbohydrate metabolism, nucleoside metabolism, the glutamate metabolic pathway, increased oxidative stress in the diseased state, and reduced articular cartilage breakdown. This is the first study to demonstrate differences in the metabolic profile of infected and noninfected human SF, using a noninfected matched cohort, and may represent putative biomarkers that form the basis of new diagnostic tests for infected SF. Cite this article: Bone Joint Res 2021;10(1):85–95. The British Editorial Society of Bone & Joint Surgery 2021-01-27 /pmc/articles/PMC7845460/ /pubmed/33502243 http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.101.BJR-2020-0285.R1 Text en © 2021 Author(s) et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) licence, which permits the copying and redistribution of the work only, and provided the original author and source are credited. See https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
spellingShingle Synovium
Akhbari, Pouya
Jaggard, Matthew K.
Boulangé, Claire L.
Vaghela, Uddhav
Graça, Gonçalo
Bhattacharya, Rajarshi
Lindon, John C.
Williams, Horace R. T.
Gupte, Chinmay M.
Differences between infected and noninfected synovial fluid: an observational study using metabolic phenotyping (or “metabonomics")
title Differences between infected and noninfected synovial fluid: an observational study using metabolic phenotyping (or “metabonomics")
title_full Differences between infected and noninfected synovial fluid: an observational study using metabolic phenotyping (or “metabonomics")
title_fullStr Differences between infected and noninfected synovial fluid: an observational study using metabolic phenotyping (or “metabonomics")
title_full_unstemmed Differences between infected and noninfected synovial fluid: an observational study using metabolic phenotyping (or “metabonomics")
title_short Differences between infected and noninfected synovial fluid: an observational study using metabolic phenotyping (or “metabonomics")
title_sort differences between infected and noninfected synovial fluid: an observational study using metabolic phenotyping (or “metabonomics")
topic Synovium
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7845460/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33502243
http://dx.doi.org/10.1302/2046-3758.101.BJR-2020-0285.R1
work_keys_str_mv AT akhbaripouya differencesbetweeninfectedandnoninfectedsynovialfluidanobservationalstudyusingmetabolicphenotypingormetabonomics
AT jaggardmatthewk differencesbetweeninfectedandnoninfectedsynovialfluidanobservationalstudyusingmetabolicphenotypingormetabonomics
AT boulangeclairel differencesbetweeninfectedandnoninfectedsynovialfluidanobservationalstudyusingmetabolicphenotypingormetabonomics
AT vaghelauddhav differencesbetweeninfectedandnoninfectedsynovialfluidanobservationalstudyusingmetabolicphenotypingormetabonomics
AT gracagoncalo differencesbetweeninfectedandnoninfectedsynovialfluidanobservationalstudyusingmetabolicphenotypingormetabonomics
AT bhattacharyarajarshi differencesbetweeninfectedandnoninfectedsynovialfluidanobservationalstudyusingmetabolicphenotypingormetabonomics
AT lindonjohnc differencesbetweeninfectedandnoninfectedsynovialfluidanobservationalstudyusingmetabolicphenotypingormetabonomics
AT williamshoracert differencesbetweeninfectedandnoninfectedsynovialfluidanobservationalstudyusingmetabolicphenotypingormetabonomics
AT guptechinmaym differencesbetweeninfectedandnoninfectedsynovialfluidanobservationalstudyusingmetabolicphenotypingormetabonomics