Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 416

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Inflammatory Blood Laboratory Levels as Markers of Prosthetic Joint Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Berbari, Elie, Mabry, Tad, Tsaras, Geoffrey, Spangehl, Mark, Erwin, Pat J., Murad, Mohammad Hassan, Steckelberg, James, Osmon, Douglas·2010·Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The preoperative diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection in patients with a total hip or knee arthroplasty may rely in part on the use of systemic inflammation markers. These markers have unclear accuracy. The objective of this review was to summarize the evidence on the accuracy of the peripheral white blood-cell count, the erythrocyte sedimentation rate, serum C-reactive protein levels, and serum interleukin-6 levels for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection. METHODS: We searched electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, and Scopus) from 1950 through 2009. Eligible studies evaluated the accuracy of white blood-cell count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, serum C-reactive protein level, and serum interleukin-6 level for the intraoperative diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection at the time of revision arthroplasty. Two reviewers working independently extracted study characteristics and data to estimate the diagnostic odds ratio and 95% confidence interval for each result. RESULTS: We included thirty eligible studies that included 3909 revision total hip or knee arthroplasties. The prevalence of prosthetic joint infection was 32.5% (1270 of 3909). The accuracy of assessed inflammation markers, represented with a diagnostic odds ratio, was 314.7 (95% confidence interval, 113.0 to 876.8) for interleukin-6 (three studies), 13.1 (95% confidence interval, 7.9 to 21.7) for C-reactive protein level (twenty-three studies), 7.2 (95% confidence interval, 4.7 to 10.9) for erythrocyte sedimentation rate (twenty-five studies), and 4.4 (95% confidence interval, 2.9 to 6.6) for white blood-cell count (fifteen studies). CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic accuracy for prosthetic joint infection was best for interleukin-6, followed by C-reactive protein level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, and white blood-cell count. Given the limited numbers of studies assessing interleukin-6 levels, further investigations assessing the accuracy of interleukin-6 for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection are warranted.

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 · 10.2106/jbjs.i.01199

Cites

9 of 9 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 9 references

Cited by

See all 416

Metadata

Authors
Berbari, E., Mabry, T., Tsaras, G., Spangehl, M., Erwin, P. J., Murad, M. H., Steckelberg, J., & Osmon, D.
Venue
Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery
Published
2010-09-01
Volume
92
Issue
11
Pages
2102-2109
ISSN
  • 0021-9355 (ISSN-L)
  • 1535-1386
OpenAlex
W1947970674
Cited by
416
References
9
FWCI
19.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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: Inflammatory Blood Laboratory Levels as Markers of Prosthetic Joint Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2106/jbjs.i.01199
The paper
Berbari, E., Mabry, T., Tsaras, G., Spangehl, M., Erwin, P. J., Murad, M. H., Steckelberg, J., & Osmon, D. (2010). Inflammatory Blood Laboratory Levels as Markers of Prosthetic Joint Infection: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Journal of Bone and Joint Surgery. https://doi.org/10.2106/jbjs.i.01199

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.