Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2023 Aug 30;18(1):640.
doi: 10.1186/s13018-023-04061-4.

Diagnostic accuracy of positron emission tomography/computerized tomography for periprosthetic joint infection of hip: systematic review and meta-analysis

Hongning Hua  1 , Jinwen Liu  2
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Diagnostic accuracy of positron emission tomography/computerized tomography for periprosthetic joint infection of hip: systematic review and meta-analysis

Hongning Hua et al. J Orthop Surg Res. .

Erratum in

Abstract

Background: American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) has provided the guidelines for diagnosing a patient with periprosthetic joint infection including the use of positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT). Systematic evidence focussing on periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of hip is limited, which also contains limited number of studies. Hence, the current study aims to perform a pooled analysis of all studies that have assessed the diagnostic accuracy of PET/CT for PJI of hip.

Methods: Searches were done in PubMed Central, EMBASE, MEDLINE, SCOPUS and Cochrane library until December 2022. Meta-analysis was carried out using random-effects model. With 95% confidence intervals (CIs), pooled sensitivity and specificity were reported.

Results: Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria. The pooled sensitivity of PET/CT was 89% (95% CI 84-93%), while the pooled specificity was 86% (95% CI 79-91%). The AUROC was 0.94 (95% CI 0.72-0.99). There was statistically significant heterogeneity (p < 0.001) with I2 value of 96%. The diagnostic odds ratio was 52 (95% CI 26-106). Likelihood ratio positive was 6.5 (95% CI 4.1-10.3) and negative was 0.13 (95% CI 0.08-0.19).

Conclusion: Our study found that PET/CT was found to have higher level of accuracy in terms of sensitivity and specificity. Further large-scale research can help to find answers for such questions and provide final conclusive evidence on the inclusion of the imaging modality into the routine clinical practice guidelines for suspected periprosthetic joint infection patients.

Keywords: Diagnostic accuracy; Meta-analysis; Periprosthetic joint infection; Positron emission tomography.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow chart
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Forest plot showing the sensitivity and specificity of PET/CT for diagnosis of periprosthetic hip joint infection
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
SROC Curve of PET/CT for diagnosis of periprosthetic hip joint infection
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Likelihood scatter gram
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Fagan nomogram
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Meta-regression results
Fig. 7
Fig. 7
Funnel plot
Fig. 8
Fig. 8
Forest plot showing the diagnostic accuracy of Fluoride/gallium PET scan
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
Forest plot showing the diagnostic accuracy of FDG-PET scan
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. MaraditKremers H, Larson DR, Crowson CS, et al. Prevalence of total hip and knee replacement in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2015;97:1386–1397. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.N.01141. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Matharu GS, Culliford DJ, Blom AW, Judge A. Projections for primary hip and knee replacement surgery up to the year 2060: an analysis based on data from The National Joint Registry for England, Wales, Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man. Ann R Coll Surg Engl. 2022;104(6):443–448. doi: 10.1308/rcsann.2021.0206. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Labek G, Thaler M, Janda W, et al. Revision rates after total joint replacement: cumulative results from worldwide joint register datasets. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 2011;93:293–297. doi: 10.1302/0301-620X.93B3.25467. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Kapadia BH, Berg RA, Daley JA, et al. Periprosthetic joint infection. Lancet. 2016;387:386–394. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(14)61798-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Charette RS, Melnic CM. Two-stage revision arthroplasty for the treatment of prosthetic joint infection. Curr Rev Musculoskelet Med. 2018;11:332–340. doi: 10.1007/s12178-018-9495-y. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms