The Role of Biopsy in Diagnosing Infection After Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Meta-Analysis
Abstract Background Early diagnosis of periprosthetic hip and knee infection still represents a major challenge, as no single test can achieve ideal results. Currently, multiple preoperative indicators were performed to diagnose periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) to confirm or exclude infection in the early stage. However, the diagnostic value of biopsy-related tests in diagnosing periprosthetic hip and knee infection remains unclear.Methods Publications in PubMed, Embase, and the Web of Science databases were searched systematically until October 2020. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were used for screening biopsy-related studies of the diagnosis of periprosthetic hip and knee infection. All relevant tests were analyzed using Meta-Disc. For comparison between biopsy-related and conventional diagnostic methods in the diagnosis of PJI, the sensitivity and specificity of selected studies were calculated in the subgroup and compared using the z-test. Quality assessment of the selected literature was performed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies.Results Three biopsy-related tests were identified in 14 articles and further analyzed in the present meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity was 0.90 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.87–0.93), 0.97 (95% CI, 0.95–0.98) for the combined method (microbial culture plus histology), 0.76 (95% CI: 0.71–0.80) and 0.94 (95% CI: 0.91–0.95) for microbiological tests, and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.45–0.77), 0.97 (95% CI: 0.92–0.99) for histology. The pooled diagnostic odds ratios for diagnosing PJI using the combined method, microbiological test, and histology were 229.61 (95% CI: 94.90–555.56), 40.44 (95% CI: 23.74–68.89), and 54.47 (95% CI: 11.66–254.43), respectively. The combined method had the highest value for the area under the curve (0.9805), followed by histology (0.9425) and microbiological tests (0.9292). In the subgroup, statistical differences were identified in sensitivity and specificity for PJI diagnosis between the synovial fluid culture and biopsy culture group (P<0.001), as well as in the biopsy-related combined method and serum C-reactive protein (CRP; P<0.001).ConclusionsBiopsy culture does not appear to be advantageous compared to synovial fluid culture in the preoperative diagnosis of periprosthetic hip and knee infection. In contrast, combined biopsy microbial culture with histology analysis shows great potential in improving the preoperative diagnosis of PJI. The standard procedure of biopsy needs to be further explored. Further research is required to verify our results.