Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 383

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 19 of the 19 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Diagnosing Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Has the Era of the Biomarker Arrived?

Open access
Deirmengian, Carl, Kardos, Keith, Kilmartin, Patrick, Cameron, Alexander, Schiller, Kevin, Parvizi, Javad·2014·Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) remains a serious clinical challenge. There is a pressing need for improved diagnostic testing methods; biomarkers offer one potentially promising approach. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES: We evaluated the diagnostic characteristics of 16 promising synovial fluid biomarkers for the diagnosis of PJI. METHODS: Synovial fluid was collected from 95 patients meeting the inclusion criteria of this prospective diagnostic study. All patients were being evaluated for a revision hip or knee arthroplasty, including patients with systemic inflammatory disease and those already receiving antibiotic treatment. The Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) definition was used to classify 29 PJIs and 66 aseptic joints. Synovial fluid samples were tested by immunoassay for 16 biomarkers optimized for use in synovial fluid. Sensitivity, specificity, and receiver operating characteristic curve analysis were performed to assess for diagnostic performance. RESULTS: Five biomarkers, including human α-defensin 1-3, neutrophil elastase 2, bactericidal/permeability-increasing protein, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin, and lactoferrin, correctly predicted the MSIS classification of all patients in this study, with 100% sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of PJI. An additional eight biomarkers demonstrated excellent diagnostic strength, with an area under the curve of greater than 0.9. CONCLUSIONS: Synovial fluid biomarkers exhibit a high accuracy in diagnosing PJI, even when including patients with systemic inflammatory disease and those receiving antibiotic treatment. Considering that these biomarkers match the results of the more complex MSIS definition of PJI, we believe that synovial fluid biomarkers can be a valuable addition to the methods utilized for the diagnosis of infection. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level II, diagnostic study. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s11999-014-3543-8

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 19 references

Cited by

See all 383

Metadata

Authors
Deirmengian, C., Kardos, K., Kilmartin, P., Cameron, A., Schiller, K., & Parvizi, J.
Venue
Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research
Published
2014-11
Volume
472
Issue
11
Pages
3254-3262
ISSN
0009-921X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1974464334
Cited by
383
References
19
FWCI
32.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Diagnosing Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Has the Era of the Biomarker Arrived? https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s11999-014-3543-8
The paper
Deirmengian, C., Kardos, K., Kilmartin, P., Cameron, A., Schiller, K., & Parvizi, J. (2014). Diagnosing Periprosthetic Joint Infection: Has the Era of the Biomarker Arrived? Clinical Orthopaedics & Related Research. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-014-3543-8

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.