Histological Analysis of Periprosthetic Tissue for Detecting Prosthetic Joint Infection

  • Andrej CörEmail author


The possibility of differentiating an aseptic loosening from prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is rather difficult when clinical findings are poor or even absent but is very important since the treatments are different. Unfortunately, to date, there is no preoperative or intraoperative test that is 100 % sensitive and specific for diagnosis of prosthetic infection. Several authors proposed analysis of either frozen or permanent histological sections of periprosthetic tissue as a reliable method for PJI detection. Histological analysis using various criteria for the determination of “positivity” has been touted as a rapid and inexpensive test that has a high specificity; however, its sensitivity has been widely inconsistent ranging from 18 to 100 % in various studies. Histological analysis of periprosthetic tissue at joint revision surgery could be helpful when preoperative tests are ambiguous, but careful attention to the application of criteria for a histological diagnosis must be made to preclude diagnostic errors.


Diagnosis Histology Frozen sections Sampling 


  1. 1.
    Abdul-Karim FM, McGinis MG, Kraay M, et al. Frozen section biopsy assessment for the presence of polymorphonuclear leukocytes in patients undergoing revision of arthroplasties. Mod Pathol. 1998;11:427–31.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Athanasou NA, Pandey R, de Steiger R, et al. The role of intraoperative frozen sections in revision total joint arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1997;79:1433–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Banit DM, Kaufer H, Harford JM. Intraoperative frozen section analysis in revision total joint arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;400:230–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bori G, Soriano A, Garcia S, et al. Low sensitivity of histology to predict the presence of microorganisms in suspected aseptic loosening of a joint prosthesis. Mod Pathol. 2006;19:874–7. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.3800606.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bori G, Soriano A, Garcia S, Mallofre C, Riba J, Mensa J. Usefulness of histological analysis for predicting the presence of microorganisms at the time of reimplantation after hip resection arthroplasty for the treatment of infection. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2007;89:1232–7. doi: 10.2106/JBJS.F.00741.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bori G, Soriano A, Garcia S, Gallart X, Mallofre C, Mensa J. Neutrophils in frozen sections and type of microorganism isolated at the time of resection arthroplasty for the treatment of infection. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2009;129:591–5. doi: 10.1007/s00402-008-0679-6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bori G, Monuz-Mahamud E, Garcia S, et al. Interface membrane is the best sample for histological study to diagnose prosthetic joint infection. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:579–84. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2010.219.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Borrego AF, Martinez FM, Parra JLC, Graneda DS, Crespo RG, Stern LLD. Diagnosis of infection in hip and knee revision surgery: intraoperative frozen section analysis. Int Orthop. 2007;31:33–7. doi: 10.1007/s00264-005-0069-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Charosky CB, Bullough PG, Wilson PD. Total hip replacement failures. A histological ­evaluation. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1973;55:49–58.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Della Valle CJ, Bogner E, Desai P, et al. Analysis of frozen sections of intraoperative ­specimens obtained at the time of reoperation after hip or knee resection arthroplasty for the treatment of infection. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81:684–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fehring TK, McAlister Jr JA. Frozen histological section as a guide to sepsis in revision joint arthroplasty. Clin Orthop. 1994;304:229–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Feldman DS, Lonner JS, Desal P, Zuckerman JD. The role of intraoperative frozen sections in revision total joint arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77:1807–13.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ince A, Rupp J, Fromelt L, Katzer A, Gille J, Lohr JF. Is “aseptic” loosening of the prosthetic cup after total hip replacement due to nonculturable bacterial pathogens in patients with low-grade infection? Clin Infect Dis. 2004;39:1599–603.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lonner JH, Desai P, Dicesare PE, Steiner G, Zuckerman JD. The reliability of analysis of intraoperative frozen sections for identifying acute infection during revision hip or knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78:1553–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mira JM, Amstutz HC, Matos M, et al. The pathology of the joint tissue and its clinical relevance in prosthesis failure. Clin Orthop. 1976;117:221–40.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moran E, Byren I, Atkins L. Diagnosis and management of prosthetic joint infections. J Antimicrob Chemother. 2010;65 Suppl 3:45–54. doi: 10.1093/jac/dkq305.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Morawietz L, Classen RA, Schroder JH, et al. Proposal of histopathological consensus classification of the periprosthetic interface membrane. J Clin Pathol. 2006;59:591–7. doi: 10.1136/jcp.2005.027485.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Morawietz L, Tiddens O, Mueller M, et al. Twenty-three neutrophil granulocytes in 10 high-power fields is the best histopathological threshold to differentiate between aseptic and septic endoprosthesis loosening. Histopathology. 2009;847–853. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2559.2009.03313.x.
  19. 19.
    Müller M, Morawietz L, Hasart O, Strube P, Perka C, Tohtz S. Diagnosis of periprosthetic infection following total hip arthroplasty-evaluation of the diagnostic values of pre- and intraoperative parameters and the associated strategy to preoperatively select patients with a high probability of joint infection. J Orthop Surg Res. 2008;3:31. doi: 10.1186/1749-799X-3-31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Nunez LV, Buttaro MA, Morandi A, Pusso R, Piccaluga F. Frozen sections of samples taken intraoperatively for diagnosis of infection in revision hip surgery. Acta Orthop. 2007;78:226–30. doi: 10.1080/17453670710013726.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Pandey R, Drakoulakis E, Athanasou NA. An assessment of the histological criteria used to diagnose infection in hip revision arthroplasty tissues. J Clin Pathol. 1999;52:118–23.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pons M, Angels F, Sanchez C, et al. Infected total hip arthroplasty-the value of intraoperative histology. Int Orthop. 1999;23:34–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Spangehl MJ, Masri BA, O’Connel JX, et al. Prospective analysis of preoperative and intraoperative investigational for the diagnosis of infection at the sites of two hundred and two revision total hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81:672–83.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Tohtz SW, Muller M, Morawietz L, Winkler T, Parka C. Validity of frozen sections for analysis of periprosthetic loosening membranes. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2010;468:762–8. doi: 10.107/s! 1999-009-1102-5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wong YC, Lee QJ, Wai YL, Ng WF. Intraoperative frozen section for detecting active infection in failed hip and knee arthroplasties. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:1015–20. doi: 10.1016/j.arth.2004.08.003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Health Sciences, University of PrimorskaIzolaSlovenia

Personalised recommendations