Diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection using alpha-defensin test or multiplex-PCR: ideal diagnostic test still

Arnold J Suda1,2,3, Marco Tinelli4, Nils D Beisemann4

  • 1Department of Orthopaedic and Trauma Surgery, University Medical Center Mannheim, Medical Faculty Mannheim of Heidelberg University, Theodor-Kutzer-Ufer 1-3, 68167, Mannheim, Germany. arnoldsuda@yahoo.com.

Abstract

Insights

Diagnosing periprosthetic infection is challenging. Conventional microbiological methods remain the most reliable for detecting infections, outperforming newer alpha-defensin tests and multiplex-PCR in accuracy.

Area of Science:

  • Orthopedic surgery
  • Infectious disease diagnostics
  • Biomarker research

Background:

  • Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis is complex.
  • Newer diagnostic methods like multiplex-PCR and alpha-defensin tests are being explored.
  • Comparison with traditional methods is crucial for clinical adoption.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To compare the diagnostic accuracy of multiplex-PCR and alpha-defensin tests against conventional methods for PJI.
  • To evaluate the reliability of these novel biomarkers in detecting periprosthetic infections.

Main Methods:

  • Study included 28 patients (30 joints) undergoing removal of total hip or knee arthroplasty.
  • Specimens (fluid and tissue) were analyzed using conventional microbiology, alpha-defensin test, multiplex-PCR, and histopathology.
  • Patients were classified using the modified Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) score.

Main Results:

  • Alpha-defensin test sensitivity: 76.9%, specificity: 82.4%.
  • Multiplex-PCR sensitivity: 30.8%, specificity: 100%.
  • Conventional microbiological methods showed 84.6% sensitivity and 100% specificity, outperforming multiplex-PCR and being comparable to alpha-defensin.

Conclusions:

  • Neither alpha-defensin nor multiplex-PCR reliably detected periprosthetic infections in this study.
  • Multiplex-PCR was better for identifying uninfected cases.
  • Conventional microbiological methods remain the gold standard for diagnosing periprosthetic infections.