Biochemical markers in total joint arthroplasty: electrophoresis of joint fluid proteins as a new diagnostic tool for prosthetic performance

  • Andreea ChivaEmail author
General Review


Despite the advances in prosthetic materials and surgical procedures, osteolysis and aseptic loosening are the most common cause of orthopedic implant failure in total joint arthroplasty. Because of risk factors diversity and complexity of cellular and biochemical mechanisms of osteolysis, the challenge is to identify new biochemical markers, more specific and sensitive, for early detection of biochemical changes in joint fluid and screening of patient with high risk for aseptic loosening. Current systemic markers of implant wear include markers of bone turnover (propeptides and telopeptides of collagen) and inflammatory reactions (interleukins), as well as products of wear process (metal ions). The multitude of interferences, the great amounts of biological fluid necessary for analysis, and the viscosity of joint fluid limit their clinical value. Electrophoresis of joint fluid proteins using Hyrys-Hydrasys SEBIA France system enriches the panel of biochemical tests available for assessment of aseptic loosening. The multitude of proteins that can be separated using a small quantity of joint fluid with minor interferences is the main advantage of this investigation technique. The electrophoretic biomarkers as well as their diagnostic and prognostic value in aseptic loosening are presented.


Arthroplasty Aseptic loosening Electrophoresis Proteins Joint fluid 


Conflict of interest

No conflict of interest to declare. No benefits in any form have been or will be received from a commercial part related directly or indirectly to the subject of this manuscript.


  1. 1.
    Hallab NJ, Jacobs JJ (2009) Biologic effect of implant debris. Bull NYU Hosp JT Dis 67:182–188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Savarino L, Granchi D, Cenni E, Baldini N, Greco M, Giunti A (2005) Systemic cross-linked N-terminal telopeptide and procollagen I C-terminal extension peptide as markers of bone turnover after total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg 87-B:571–576CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Streich NA, Gotterbarm T, Jung M, Schneider U, Heisel C (2009) Biochemical markers of bone turnover in aseptic loosening in hip arthroplasty. Int Orthop 33:77–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Wang ML, Sharkey PF, Tuan RS (2004) Particle bioreactivity and wear-mediated osteolysis. J Arthroplasty 19:1028–1038PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Goodman SB (2007) Wear particles, periprosthetic osteolysis and the immune system. Biomaterials 28:5044–5048PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Abu-Amer Y, Darwech I, Clohisy JC (2007) Aseptic loosening of total joint replacements: mechanisms underlying osteolysis and potential therapies. Arthritis Res Ther 9(Suppl 1):S6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ingham E, Fisher J (2005) The role of macrophages in osteolysis of total joint replacement. Biomaterials 26:1271–1286PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Revell AP (2008) The combined role of wear particles, macrophages and lymphocytes in the loosening of total joint prostheses. J R Soc Interface 5:1263–1278PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gilardetti RS, Chaibi MS, Stroumza J et al (1991) High–affinity binding of PDGF-AA and PDGF-BB to normal human osteoblastic cells and modulation by interleukin-1. Am J Physiol 261:980–985Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Konttinen YT, Xu JW, Imai S et al (1997) Cytokines in aseptic loosening of total hip replacement. Curr Orthop 11:40–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bauer TW (2002) Particles and periimplant bone resorption. Clin Orthop 405:138–143PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Greenfield EM et al (2002) The role of osteoclast differentiation in aseptic loosening. J Orthop Res 20:1–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hirashima Y et al (2001) Osteoclast induction from bone marrow cells is due to pro-inflammatory mediators from macrophages exposed to polyethylene particles: a possible mechanisms of osteolysis in failed THA. J Biomed Mater Res 56:177–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Merry P, Grootveld M, Lunec J, Blake DR (1991) Oxidative damage to lipids within the inflamed human joint provides evidence of radical-mediated hypoxic-reperfusion injury. Am J Clin Nutr 53:362s–369sPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Neale SD et al (2000) Human bone-derived cells support formation of human osteoclasts from arthroplasty-derived cells in vitro. J Bone Joint Surg Br 82:892PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sabokbar A, Kudo O, Athanasou NA (2003) Two distinct cellular mechanisms of osteoclast formation and bone resorption in periprosthetic osteolysis. J Orthop Res 21:73–80PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Goodman SB, Goldberg V, O’ Kneefe R (2008) Biology summary. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 16(suppl 1):S76–S78Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Moilanen E et al (1997) Nitric oxide syntase is expressed in human macrophages during foreign body inflammation. Am J Pathol 150:881–887PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Shanbagh AS et al (1998) Nitric oxide release by macropages in response to particulate wear debris. J Biomed Mater Res 41:497–503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Wang ML et al (2002) Exposure to particles stimulates superoxide production by human THP-1 macrophages and avian HD-1 EM osteoclasts activated by tumor necrosis factor-alpha and PMA. J Arthroplasty 17:335–346PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Tucci M et al (2000) Levels of hydrogen peroxide in tissues adjacent to failing implantable devices may play an active role in cytokine production. Biomed Sci Instrum 36:215–220PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kinov P, Leithner A, Radi R, Bodo K, Khoschsorur GA, Schauenstein K, Windhager R (2006) Role of free radicals in aseptic loosening of hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Res 24:55–62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Tuan RS, Lee F Y, Konttinen YT, Wilkinson JM, Smith RL (2008) What are the local and systemic biologic reactions and mediators to wear debris and what host factors determine or modulate the biologic response to wear particles? J Am Acad Orthop Surg 16(suppl 1):S42–S48Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bauer TW, Shanbhag AS (2008) Are biological markers of wear? J Acad Orthop Surg 16(suppl 1):S68–S71Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Heisel C, Silva M, Skipor AK, Jacobs JJ, Schmalzried TR (2005) The relationship between activity and ions in patients with metal-on-metal bearing hip prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:781–787PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Schneider U, Schmidt-Rohlfing B, Knopf U, Breusch SJ (2002/2003) Effects upon bone metabolism following total hip and total knee arthroplasty. Pathobiology 70:26–33Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wilkinson JM, Hamer AJ, Rogers A, Stockley I, Eastell R (2003) Bone mineral density and biochemical markers of bone turnover in aseptic loosening after total hip arthroplasty. J Orthop Res 21:691–696PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Beraudi A, Stea S, Cremonini S, Visentin M, Toni A (2009) Assessment of five interleukins in human synovial fluid as possible markers for aseptic loosening of hip arthroplasty. Artif Organs 33:538–543PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Hundric-Haspi Z, Pecina M, Tomicic M, Jukic I (2006) Plasma cytokines as markers of aseptic prosthesis loosening. Clin Orthop Relat Res 453:299–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nivbrant B, Karlsson K, Kärrholm J (1999) Cytokine levels in synovial fluid from hips with well-functioning or loose prostheses. J Bone Joint Surg Br 81-B:163–166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Kitamura H, Kawata H, Takahashi F, Higuchi Y, Furuichi T, Ohkawa H (1995) Bone marrow neutrophilia and suppressed bone turnover in human interleukin-6 transgenic mice. A cellular relationship among hematopoietic cells, osteoblasts, and osteoclasts mediated by stromal cells in bone marrow. Am J Pathol 147:1682–1692PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Motomura T, Kasayama S, Takagi M et al (1998) Increased interleukin-6 production in mouse osteoblastic MC3T3–E1 cells expressing activating mutant of the stimulatory G protein. J Bone Miner Res 13:1084–1091PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Fritz EA, Glant TT, Vermes C, Jacobs JJ, Roebuck KA (2006) Chemokine gene activation in human bone marrow-derived osteoblasts following exposure to particulate debris. J Biomed Mater Res 77:192–201CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Tanaka R, Yasunaga Y, Hisatome T, Yamasaki T, Iwamori H, Ochi M (2005) Serum interleukin 8 levels correlate with synovial fluid levels in patient with aseptic loosening of hip prosthesis. J Arthroplasty 20:1049–1054PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Calvo MS, Eyre DR, Gundberg CM (1996) Molecular basis and clinical application of biological markers of bone turnover. Endocr Rev 17:333–368PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Dati F, Metzmann E (2005) Proteins-laboratory testing and clinical use—Dia Sys Diagnostic Systems Gmbh, pp 505–508Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Han ZH, Palnitkar S, Rao DS, Nelson D, Parfitt AM (1997) Effects of ethnicity and age of menopause on the remodeling and turnover of iliac bone: implications for mechanisms of bone loss [published erratum appears in J Bone Miner Res 1999;14:660]. J Bone Miner Res 12:498–508Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Woitge HW et al (1998) Seasonal variation of biochemical indexes of bone turnover: results of a population based study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 83:68–75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Yamagiwa H, Sarkar G, Charlesworth CM, Mc Cormick JD (2003) Two-dimensional gel electrophoresis of synovial fluid: method for detecting candidate protein markers for osteoarthritis. J Orthop Sci 8:482–490PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tsai AJ, Andersson KM, Ivarsson M, Granberg B, Stark A (2009) Effects of synovial fluid from aseptic prosthesis loosening on collagen production in osteoblasts. Int Orthop 33:873–877PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Chiva A (2009) Electrophoretic analysis of joint fluid–the newest test for osteoarthritis diagnosis and endoprosthetis surveillance. Revista de Ortopedie si Traumatologie 19:122–123Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Sadzynska KA, Iwanowska BM, Zwierz K, Popko J (1999) Electrophoretic techniques in analysis of synovial fluid. Med Sci Monit 5:1191–1196Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    DeHeer DH et al (2001) In situ complement activation by polyethylene wear debris. J Biomed Mater Res 54:12–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Merry P, Grootveld M, Lunec J, Blake DR (1991) Oxidative damage to lipids within the inflamed human joint provides evidence of radical-mediated hypoxic-reperfusion injury. Am J Clin Nutr 53:362s–369sPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    James MJ, van Reyk D, Rye KA, Dean RT, Cleland LG, Barter PJ, Jessup W (1998) Low density lipoprotein of synovial fluid in inflammatory joint disease is middly oxidized. Lipids 33:1115–1121PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Bennet RM, Skosey JL (1977) Lactoferrin and lysozyme levels in sinovial fluid: differential indices of articular inflammation and degradation. Arthritis Rheum 20:84–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Caccavo D, Sebastiani GD, Di Monaco C, Guido F, Galeazzi M, Ferri GM, Bonomo L, Afeltra A (1999) Increased levels of lactoferrin in synovial fluid but not in serum from patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Int J Clin Lab Res 29:30–35PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Clinical ChemistryUniversity Emergency Hospital BucharestBucharestRomania

Personalised recommendations