Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Probenentnahme in der Revisionssituation: Was ist der richtige Weg?

Taking biopsy samples in the revision situation: what is the right way?

  • Technical Note
  • Published:
Obere Extremität Aims and scope Submit manuscript

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1
Abb. 2

Literatur

  1. Sperling JW et al (2001) Infection after shoulder arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res 382:206–216

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Singh JA et al (2012) Periprosthetic infections after total shoulder arthroplasty: a 33-year perspective. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 21(11):1534–1541

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Maccioni CB et al (2015) Low rate of propionibacterium acnes in arthritic shoulders undergoing primary total shoulder replacement surgery using a strict specimen collection technique. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 24(8):1206–1211

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bedenčič K et al (2016) Does preoperative antimicrobial prophylaxis influence the diagnostic potential of periprosthetic tissues in hip or knee infections? Clin Orthop Relat Res 474(1):258–264

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Renz N et al (2016) Implant-associated infections—diagnostics. Chirurg 87(10):813–821

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Akgun D et al (2022) The role of serum C‑reactive protein in the diagnosis of periprosthetic shoulder infection. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 142(8):1715–1721

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Akgün D et al (2023) The role of serum D‑Dimer for the diagnosis of periprosthetic shoulder infection. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 143(4):1855–1860. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00402-022-04385-6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Hecker A et al (2020) The accuracy of joint aspiration for the diagnosis of shoulder infections. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 29(3):516–520

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Garrigues GE et al (2019) Proceedings from the 2018 international consensus meeting on orthopedic infections: the definition of periprosthetic shoulder infection. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 28(6S):S8–S12

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Akgun D et al (2020) The role of implant sonication in the diagnosis of periprosthetic shoulder infection. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 29(6):e222–e228. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jse.2019.10.011

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Mederake M, Hofmann UK, Fink B (2022) The significance of synovial biopsy in the diagnostic workup of the low-grade periprosthetic joint infection of shoulder arthroplasty. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg 142(11):3157–3164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. McCarroll TR et al (2021) The incidence and incubation period of false-positive culture results in shoulder surgery. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 30(3):538–543

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Piper KE et al (2009) Microbiologic diagnosis of prosthetic shoulder infection by use of implant sonication. J Clin Microbiol 47(6):1878–1884

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Grosso MJ et al (2018) Performance of implant sonication culture for the diagnosis of periprosthetic shoulder infection. J Shoulder Elbow Surg 27(2):211–216

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Padolino A et al (2021) Implant sonication versus intraoperative tissue sample cultures for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) of shoulder arthroplasty. Acta Biomed 92(S3):e2021009

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Krenn VT et al (2017) CD15 focus score: Infection diagnosis and stratification into low-virulence and high-virulence microbial pathogens in periprosthetic joint infection. Pathol Res Pract 213(5):541–547

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Centrum für Muskuloskeletale Chirurgie, Charité – Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Augustenburger Platz 1, 13353, Berlin, Deutschland

    Doruk Akgün, Sebastian Meller, Daniel Karczewski, Isabella Weiß, Kathi Thiele & Marie Reisener

Authors
  1. Doruk Akgün
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sebastian Meller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Daniel Karczewski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Isabella Weiß
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kathi Thiele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Marie Reisener
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Doruk Akgün.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

D. Akgün, S. Meller, D. Karczewski, I. Weiß, K. Thiele und M. Reisener geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Für diesen Beitrag wurden von den Autor/-innen keine Studien an Menschen oder Tieren durchgeführt. Für die aufgeführten Studien gelten die jeweils dort angegebenen ethischen Richtlinien.

Additional information

figure qr

QR-Code scannen & Beitrag online lesen

Supplementary Information

Video: Probenentnahme in der Revisionssituation

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Akgün, D., Meller, S., Karczewski, D. et al. Probenentnahme in der Revisionssituation: Was ist der richtige Weg?. Obere Extremität 18, 103–105 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11678-023-00738-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11678-023-00738-8

Search

Navigation