Intra-Operative Cultures
We recommend that multiple cultures be obtained at the time of reoperation in patients being assessed for periprosthetic joint infection.
Rationale
Four Level I studies compared the effects of using one as opposed to more than one positive culture as a threshold for diagnosing infection, with histology of peri-implant tissue as the gold standard.2, 94, 104, 105 Two of these studies obtained at least three cultures per patient and two of these studies obtained at least two cultures per patient. Compared to histology, more than one positive culture result had a higher positive likelihood ratio for diagnosing infection than a single positive culture result.
Assessing infection using multiple cultures increases the chances of identifying infection. Cultures are easily performed during the procedure and provide reliable results as indicated by the postive likelihood ratio. Obtaining more than one culture decreases the likelihood of false negative result and may assist the clinician in clarifying a result that may be deemed a false positive based on the results of other tests.
Assessing infection using multiple cultures increases the chances of identifying infection. Cultures are easily performed during the procedure and provide reliable results as indicated by the postive likelihood ratio. Obtaining more than one culture decreases the likelihood of false negative result and may assist the clinician in clarifying a result that may be deemed a false positive based on the results of other tests.
- (104) Trampuz A, Piper KE, Hanssen AD et al. Sonication of explanted prosthetic components in bags for diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection is associated with risk of contamination. J Clin Microbiol 2006;44(2):628-631.
- (105) Trampuz A, Piper KE, Jacobson MJ et al. Sonication of removed hip and knee prostheses for diagnosis of infection. N Engl J Med 2007;357(7):654-663.
- (2) Atkins BL, Athanasou N, Deeks JJ et al. Prospective evaluation of criteria for microbiological diagnosis of prosthetic-joint infection at revision arthroplasty. The OSIRIS Collaborative Study Group. J Clin Microbiol 1998;36(10):2932-2939.
- (78) Parvizi J, Ghanem E, Menashe S, Barrack RL, Bauer TW. Periprosthetic infection: what are the diagnostic challenges? J Bone Joint Surg Am 2006;88 Suppl 4:138-147.
- (94) Schafer P, Fink B, Sandow D, Margull A, Berger I, Frommelt L. Prolonged Bacterial Culture to Identify Late Periprosthetic Joint Infection: A Promising Strategy. Clin Infect Dis 2008.
- (99) Spangehl MJ, Masri BA, O'Connell JX, Duncan CP. Prospective analysis of preoperative and intraoperative investigations for the diagnosis of infection at the sites of two hundred and two revision total hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am 1999;81(5):672-683.