Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 20, 2026

Synovial Fluid Analysis to Identify Osteoarthritis
Published on: October 20, 2022
Synovial fluid α-defensin in the diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection: the lateral flow test is an effective
Xuequan Han1, Kai Xie1, Xu Jiang1
1Shanghai Key Laboratory of Orthopaedic Implants, Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Shanghai Ninth People's Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, 639 Zhizaoju Road, Shanghai, China.
Background:
Synovial fluid α-defensin is a valuable biomarker for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Its diagnostic value for PJI has been widely evaluated recently, but results are inconsistent, especially for different test methods. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic value of laboratory-based immunoassay and lateral flow testing for the detection of α-defensin against hip and knee PJI.
Methods:
We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for articles on the diagnostic accuracy of α-defensin for PJI published up to September 2018. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, area under the curve (AUC), positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) were calculated for the evaluation of the diagnostic value of α-defensin for PJI.
Results:
Nineteen studies were included. Eleven evaluated laboratory-based immunoassay, and 10 evaluated the lateral flow test results. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, AUC, PLR, NLR, and DOR of laboratory-based immunoassays were 0.96 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.90-0.98), 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.99), 0.99 (95% CI 0.98-1.00), 35.0 (95% CI 18.5-66.2), 0.04 (95% CI 0.02-0.11), and 811 (95% CI 220-2990), respectively. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, AUC, PLR, NLR, and DOR of the lateral flow test were 0.86 (95% CI 0.81-0.91), 0.96 (95% CI 0.93-0.98), 0.95 (95% CI 0.93-0.97), 21.2 (95% CI 11.7-38.5), 0.14 (95% CI 0.10-0.21), and 148 (95% CI 64-343), respectively.
Conclusions:
Laboratory-based immunoassay of α-defensin is highly accurate for the diagnosis of hip and knee PJI. The lateral flow test is less sensitive but still a useful intraoperative detection tool for PJI.
Insights
Synovial fluid alpha-defensin (α-defensin) is a key biomarker for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI). Laboratory-based immunoassays show high accuracy, while lateral flow tests offer a useful, albeit less sensitive, intraoperative option for PJI detection.
Area of Science:
- Orthopedics
- Infectious Diseases
- Biomarker Discovery
Background:
- Synovial fluid alpha-defensin (α-defensin) serves as a critical biomarker for diagnosing periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).
- Existing diagnostic evaluations for α-defensin in PJI show inconsistent results, particularly concerning different testing methodologies.
- Accurate and reliable diagnostic tools are essential for timely PJI management.
Purpose of the Study:
- To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of laboratory-based immunoassay for α-defensin in detecting hip and knee PJI.
- To assess the diagnostic performance of lateral flow testing for α-defensin in identifying PJI.
- To compare the effectiveness of different α-defensin testing methods for PJI diagnosis.
Main Methods:
- Systematic literature search of MEDLINE and EMBASE databases up to September 2018.
- Inclusion of 19 studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of α-defensin for PJI.
- Calculation of pooled sensitivity, specificity, AUC, PLR, NLR, and DOR for both laboratory-based immunoassay and lateral flow tests.
Main Results:
- Laboratory-based immunoassays demonstrated high pooled diagnostic accuracy: sensitivity 0.96, specificity 0.97, AUC 0.99.
- Lateral flow tests showed good pooled accuracy: sensitivity 0.86, specificity 0.96, AUC 0.95.
- Laboratory-based immunoassays yielded significantly higher diagnostic odds ratios (811) compared to lateral flow tests (148).
Conclusions:
- Laboratory-based immunoassay of α-defensin is a highly accurate method for diagnosing hip and knee PJI.
- Lateral flow testing for α-defensin, while less sensitive, remains a valuable tool for intraoperative PJI detection.
- The choice of testing method impacts diagnostic performance for PJI.
More Related Videos
04:37Author Spotlight: Advancing Research on Candida albicans Biofilm-Associated Prosthetic Joint Infections
Published on: February 2, 2024
06:28Anterior Cruciate Ligament Transection and Synovial Fluid Lavage in a Rodent Model to Study Joint Inflammation and Posttraumatic Osteoarthritis
Published on: September 2, 2025
Related Concept Videos
Structural Joints: Synovial Joints
Development of the Limb Synovial Joints
The mesenchymal stem cells differentiate into chondrocytes that form the hyaline cartilage, and later the cartilaginous model of the bone. This model further transforms into a bone. This process is known as endochondral ossification.
During development, the limbs...
Effects of EDTA on End-Point Detection Methods
In the visual method, metal-ion indicators (metallochromic dyes), which have distinct colors in their free and complex forms, are added to the mixture to signal the titration's end point. They form stable complexes with metal ions, but these complexes are weaker than the corresponding metal–EDTA complexes. As a...
Method of Joints
Since plane truss members are in the same plane, each joint is subjected to a coplanar and concurrent force system. To apply the method of joints, the first step is to...
Method of Joints: Problem Solving I
Method of Joints: Problem Solving II