A simple, cost-effective screening protocol to rule out periprosthetic infection

Austin M. S., Ghanem E., Joshi A., Lindsay A., Parvizi J.

JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY, cilt.23, sa.1, ss.65-68, 2008 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier identifier

  • Yayın Türü: Makale / Tam Makale
  • Cilt numarası: 23 Sayı: 1
  • Basım Tarihi: 2008
  • Doi Numarası: 10.1016/j.arth.2007.09.005
  • Dergi Adı: JOURNAL OF ARTHROPLASTY
  • Derginin Tarandığı İndeksler: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus
  • Sayfa Sayıları: ss.65-68
  • Acıbadem Mehmet Ali Aydınlar Üniversitesi Adresli: Hayır

Özet

The differential diagnosis of pain after total knee arthroplasty includes infection. Effective screening tools should have high sensitivity and are cost-effective. We evaluated 296 patients who underwent total knee revision at our institution. One hundred sixteen patients (39%) were classified as infected and 180 patients (61%) were considered noninfected. The mean erythrocyte sedimentation rate (ESR) and C-reactive protein (CRP) of the infected patients were 85 mm/h and 110 mg/L, respectively. The mean ESR and CRP of the noninfected patients were 22 mm/h and 7 mg/L, respectively. Five patients (4%) in the infected group had both normal ESR and CRP. Infection was suspected in all 5 patients, and an organism was cultured in 4 of the 5 cases. Erythrocyte sedimentation rate and CRP, when used in combination, serve as a useful screening tool in patients with a painful total knee arthroplasty.