Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Sonication in shoulder surgery: is it necessary?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
International Orthopaedics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The objective of the present study was to determine whether sonication yields greater sensitivity when compared with the traditional tissue culture in detecting peri-implant infections in shoulder surgery.

Methods

It is a retrospective study that includes 99 shoulder surgeries with implants explanted. The inclusion criteria required at least four tissue cultures, sonication of the material explanted, and a minimum follow-up of two years. Patients were classified according to the definition of periprosthetic shoulder infection of the 2018 International Consensus Meeting on Orthopedic Infections. The classifications are definitive infection, probable infection, possible infection, and unlikely infection.

Results

Among the 99 surgical procedures, 31 were considered definitive infections, 11 possible/probable infections, and 57 unlikely infections. Considering the cases with a definitive infection, the sensitivity of the tissue culture was 87.09% and the sensitivity of sonication stood at 80.64% (p = 0.406). Analyzing the cases with a definitive infection and those having a possible/probable infection together and comparing them with those with unlikely infection, the sensitivity of sonication was 80.4% and the sensitivity of the tissue culture came to 91.4%. The specificity of the sonication was 98.1% and the specificity of the tissue culture was 99.6%.

Conclusion

The sensitivity of sonication in shoulder surgery (80.64%) is not superior to the sensitivity of the tissue culture (87.09%). Specificity remains high with both methods, being 98.1% in the sonication group and 99.6% in the tissue culture. Sonication brings no benefit to the detection of shoulder per-implant infections.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sperling JW, Kozak TK, Hanssen AD, Cofield RH (2001) Infection after shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 382:206–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Topolski MS, Chin PYK, Sperling JW, Cofield RH (2006) Revision shoulder arthroplasty with positive intraoperative cultures: the value of preoperative studies and intraoperative histology. J Shoulder Elb Surg 15:402–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2005.10.001

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Achermann Y, Goldstein EJC, Coenye T, Shirtliff ME (2014) Propionibacterium acnes: from commensal to opportunistic biofilm-associated implant pathogen. Clin Microbiol Rev 27:419–440. https://doi.org/10.1128/CMR.00092-13

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Boisrenoult P (2018) Cutibacterium acnes prosthetic joint infection: diagnosis and treatment. Orthop Traumatol Surg Res 104:S19–S24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.otsr.2017.05.030

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Berbari EF, Marculescu C, Sia I, Lahr BD, Hanssen AD, Steckelberg JM, Gullerud R, Osmon DR (2007) Culture-negative prosthetic joint infection. Clin Infect Dis 45:1113–1119. https://doi.org/10.1086/522184

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Buchalter DB, Mahure SA, Mollon B, Yu S, Kwon YW, Zuckerman JD (2017) Two-stage revision for infected shoulder arthroplasty. J Shoulder Elb Surg 26:939–947. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2016.09.056

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Torrens C, Santana F, Ll P, Sorli L, Alier A (2018) Results of cement spacer sonication in the second stage of two-stage treatment of shoulder arthroplasty infection. J Orthop Surg Res 20:58. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13018-018-0763-8

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Trampuz A, Piper KE, Jacobson MJ, Hanssen AD, Unni KK, Osmon DR, Mandrekar JN, Cockerill FR, Steckelberg JM, Greenleaf JF, Patel R (2007) Sonication of removed hip and knee prostheses for diagnosis of infection. N Engl J Med 357:654–663. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa061588

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Grosso MJ, Frangiamore SJ, Yakubek G, Bauer TW, Iannotti JP, Richetti ET (2018) Performance of implant sonication culture for the diagnosis of periprosthetic shoulder infection. J Shoulder Elb Surg 27:211–216. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2017.08.008

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Piper KE, Jacobson MJ, Cofield RH, Sperling JW, Sanchez-Sotelo J, Osmon DR, McDowell A, Patrick S, Steckelberg JM, Mandrekar JN, Fernandez Samperdro M, Patel R (2009) Microbiologic diagnosis of prosthetic shoulder infection by use of implant sonication. J Clin Microbiol 47:1878–1884. https://doi.org/10.1128/JCM.01686-08

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  11. Garrigues GE, Zmistowski B, Cooper AM, Green A, ICM Shoulder Group (2019) Proceedings from the 2018 International Consensus Meeting on Orthopedic Infections: the definition of periprosthetic shoulder infection. J Shoulder Elbow Surgery 28:S8–S12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2019.04.034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Frangiamore SJ, Saleh A, Grosso MJ, Kovac MF, Higuera CA, Iannotti JP, Ricchetti ET (2015) α-Defensin as a predictor of periprosthetic shoulder infection. J Shoulder Elb Surg 24:1021–1027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2014.12.021

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Frangiamore SJ, Saleh A, Kovac MF, Grosso MJ, Zhang X, Bauer TW, Daly TM, Ricchetti ET, Iannotti JP (2015) Synovial fluid interleukin-6 as a predictor of periprosthetic shoulder infection. J Bone Joint Surg 97:63–70. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.N.00104

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Grosso MJ, Frangiamolre SJ, Saleh A, Kovac MF, Hayashi R, Ricchetti ET, Bauer TW, Iannotti JP (2014) Poor utility of serum interleukin-6 levels to predict indolent periprosthetic shoulder infections. J Shoulder Elb Surg 23:1277–1281. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2013.12.023

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Nelson GN, Paxton ES, Narzikul A, Williams G, Lazarus MD, Abboud JA (2015) Leukocyte esterase in the diagnosis of shoulder periprosthetic joint infection. J Shoulder Elb Surg 24:1421–1426. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2015.05.034

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Villacis D, Merriman JA, Yalamanchili R, Omid R, Itamura J, Hatch GFR III (2014) Serum interleukin-6 as a marker of periprosthetic shoulder infection. J Bone Joint Surg 96:41–45. https://doi.org/10.2106/JBJS.L.01634

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Holinka J, Bauer L, Hirschl AM, Graninger W, Windhager R, Presterl E (2011) Sonication cultures of explanted components as an add-on test to routinely conducted microbiological diagnostics improve pathogen detection. J Orthop Res 29:617–622. https://doi.org/10.1002/jor.21286

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Janz V, Wassilew GI, Kribus M, Trampuz A, Perka C (2015) Improved identification of polymicrobial infection in total knee arthroplasty through sonicate fluid cultures. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 135:1453–1457. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-015-2317-4

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Portillo ME, Salvadó M, Alier A, Martínez S, Ll S, Horcajada JP, Ll P (2014) Advantages of sonication fluid culture for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection. J Inf Secur 69:35–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2014.03.002

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Ll P-V, Alentorn-Geli E, Gonzalez-Cuevas A, Sorli L, Salvadó M, Alier A et al (2013) Implant sonication increases the diagnostic accuracy of infection in patients with delayed, but not early, orthopaedic implant failure. Bone Joint J 95-B:244–249. https://doi.org/10.1302/0301-620X.95B2.30486

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The author’s wish to thank Xavier Duran Jordà, MStat, PhD (Methodology and Biostatistics Support Unit, Institute Hospital del Mar for Medical Research (IMIM), Barcelona, Spain) for his work in data analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

CT has conceptualized and designed the study, analyzed and interpreted the data, and drafted the manuscript; AF has collected data, analyzed and interpreted the data, and revised the manuscript; FS has collected data, analyzed and interpreted the data, and revised the manuscript; LLP has collected data, analyzed and interpreted the data, and revised the manuscript; AA has conceptualized and designed the study, has collected data, analyzed and interpreted the data, and revised the manuscript. All authors have approved the final manuscript as submitted.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Carlos Torrens.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethics approval

The study was approved by the ethical committee with number 2019/8493/I (CEIC-Parc de Salut Mar) and all patients involved signed informed consent.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Torrens, C., Fraile, A., Santana, F. et al. Sonication in shoulder surgery: is it necessary?. International Orthopaedics (SICOT) 44, 1755–1759 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04543-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04543-8

Keywords

Navigation