[Whats new for the diagnosis of periprosthetic infections after the Philadelphia consensus?]

Abstract

We now have a great variety of laboratory diagnostic tools, for the detection of PJI, some of them widely used and others under study. After the Philadelphia Consensus, they have emerged some new biomarkers. Because of that, we consider useful to review which new biomarkers we have for the diagnosis of PJI after the Consensus and which of them could be more useful in daily clinic work. <b>Material and methods:</b> We searched for articles published from 2013 to 2017 in 5 high impact journals. The analized variables were: biomarker type, cutoff value, sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, area under the curve, positive likelihood ratio, negative likelihood ratio, diagnostic odds ratio. We value their evidence level. <b>Results:</b> Results were grouped in tables. They were found 54 articles, 31 of them didnt meet the inclusion criteria so they were excluded; 23 studies were included in the revision. We found a total of 19 biomarkers studies, 5 of them werent reported before 2013: Sinovial defensin 1, human defensin-3, sinovial lactate and Toll-like receptors 1 and 6. <b>Conclusion:</b> Of all the markers reviewed for the diagnosis of PJI, C reactive protein, esterase test strip, interleukin-6, interleukin-1 , defensin and interleukin-17 show the highest diagnostic utility. We found 5 new markers. The articles studies show high heterogeneity in their reported sensitivity, specificity and cutoff values. In most of them were not used advanced statistical tools which could make them more reliable.