Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Should Gram Stains Have a Role in Diagnosing Hip Arthroplasty Infections?

  • Symposium: Complications of Hip Arthroplasty
  • Published:
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research®

Abstract

Background

The utility of Gram stains in diagnosing periprosthetic infections following total hip arthroplasty has recently been questioned. Several studies report low sensitivity of the test, and its poor ability to either confirm or rule out infection in patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty. Despite this, many institutions including that of the senior author continue to perform Gram stains during revision total hip arthroplasty.

Questions/purposes

We assessed the sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and positive and negative predictive values of Gram stains from surgical-site samplings taken from procedures on patients with both infected and aseptic revision total hip arthroplasties.

Methods

A review was performed on patients who underwent revision total hip arthroplasty between 2000 and 2007. Eighty-two Gram stains were performed on patients who had infected total hip arthroplasties and underwent revision procedures. Additionally, of the 410 revision total hip arthroplasties performed on patients who were confirmed infection-free, 120 Gram stains were performed. Patients were diagnosed as infected using multiple criteria at the time of surgery. Sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and accuracy were calculated from these Gram stain results.

Results

The Gram stain demonstrated a sensitivity and specificity of 9.8% and 100%, respectively. In this series, the Gram stain had a negative predictive value of 62%, a positive predictive value of 100%, and an accuracy of 63%.

Conclusions

Gram stains obtained from surgical-site samples had poor sensitivity and poor negative predictive value. Based on these findings, as well as those of other authors, we believe that Gram stains should no longer be considered for diagnosing infections in revision total hip arthroplasty.

Level of Evidence

Level III, diagnostic study. See Guidelines for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Athanasou JA, Pandey R, DeSteiger R, Crook D, McLardy-Smith P. Diagnosis of infection by frozen section during revision arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1995;77:28–33.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Atkins BL, Athanosou N, Deeks JJ, Crook DWM, Simpson H, Peto TEA, McLardy-Smith P, Berendt AR. Prospective evaluation of criteria for microbiological diagnosis of prosthetic-joint infection at revision arthroplasty. J Clin Micro. 1998;36:2932–2939.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Banit DM, Kaufer H, Fartford JM. Intraoperative frozen section analysis in revision total joint arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2002;401:230–238.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Bauer TW, Parvizi J, Kobayashi N, Krebs V. Diagnosis of periprosthetic infection. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:869–882.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Bernard L, Lubbeke A, Stern R, Bru JP, Feron JM, Peyramond D, Denormandie P, Arvieux C, Chirouze C, Perronne C, Hoffmeyer P. Value of preoperative investigations in diagnosing prosthetic joint infection: retrospective cohort study and literature review. Scan J Infect Dis. 2004;36:410–416.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bori G, Soriano A, Garcia S, Gallart X, Mallofre C, Mensa J. Neutrophils in frozen section and type of microorganism isolated at the time of resection arthroplasty for the treatment of infection. Arch Orthop Trauma Surg. 2009;129:591–595.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 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;89:1232–1237.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chimento GF, Finger S, Barrack RL. Gram stain detection of infection during revision arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1996;78:838–839.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. DellaValle CJ. Periprosthetic sepsis. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2004;420:26–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Della Valle CJ, Bogner E, Desai P, Lonner JH, Adler E, Zuckerman JD, Di Cesare PE. 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;81:684–689.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. DellaValle CJ, Scher DM, Kim YH, Oxley CM, Desai P, Zuckerman JD, DiCesare PE. The role of intraoperative Gram stain in revision total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1999;14:500–504.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Garvin KL, Hanssen AD. Current Concepts Review: infection after total hip arthroplasty: past, present and future. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1995;77:1576–1588.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ghanem E, Ketonis C, Restrepo C, Joshi A, Barrack R, Parvizi J. Periprosthetic infection: where do we stand with regard to Gram stain? Acta Ortho. 2009;80:37–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ghanem E, Parvizi J, Burnett RSJ, Sharkey PF, Keshavarzi N, Aggarwal A, Barrack RL. Cell count and differential of aspirated fluid in the diagnosis of infection at the site of total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:1637–1643.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hughes PW, Salvati EA, Wilson PD, Blumenfeld EL. Treatment of subacute sepsis of the hip by antibiotics and joint replacement criteria for diagnosis with evaluation of twenty-six cases. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1979;141:143–157.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ko OS, Ip D, Chow KP, Cheung F, Lee OB, Lam JJ. The role of intraoperative frozen section in decision making in revision hip and knee arthroplasties in a local community hospital. J Arthroplasty. 2005;20:189–195.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Kraemer WJ, Saplys R, Waddell JP, Morton J. Bone scan, gallium scan, and hip aspiration in the diagnosis of infected total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1993;8:611–616.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lachiewicz PF, Rodgers GD, Thomason HC. Aspiration of the hip joint before revision total hip arthroplasty. Clinical and laboratory factors influencing attainment of a positive culture. J Bone Joint Surg. 1996;78:749–754.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Leone JM, Hanssen AD. Management of infection at the site of a total knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:2335–2348.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lonner JH, Desai P, Dicesare PE, Steiner G, Zuckerman JD. The reliability of analysis of intraoperative frozen sections for identifying active infection during revision hip or knee arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1996;78:1553–1558.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Pandey R, Drakoulakis E, Athanasou NA. An assessment of the histological crtiteria used to diagnose infection in hip revision arthroplasty tissues. J Clin Path. 1999;52:118–123.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Schinsky MF, DellaValle CJ, Sporer SM, Paprosky WG. Perioperative testing for joint infection in patients undergoing revision total hip arthroplasty. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2008;90:1869–1875.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Spangehl MJ, Masri BA, O’Connell JX, Duncan CP. Prospective analysis of preoperative and intraoperative investigations for the diagnosis of infection at the sites of two hundred and two revision total hip arthroplasties. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1999;81:672–683.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Spangehl MJ, Masterson E, Mastri BA, O’Connell JC, Duncan CP. The role of intraoperative Gram stain in the diagnosis of infection during revision total hip arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 1999;14:952–956.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopedics, Center for Joint Preservation and Reconstruction, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, 2401 West Belvedere Avenue, Baltimore, MD, 21215, USA

    Aaron J. Johnson MD, Michael G. Zywiel MD, D. Alex Stroh BS, David R. Marker BS & Michael A. Mont MD

Authors
  1. Aaron J. Johnson MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael G. Zywiel MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. D. Alex Stroh BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. David R. Marker BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Michael A. Mont MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael A. Mont MD.

Additional information

One of the authors (MAM) is a consultant for Stryker Orthopaedics, Mahwah, NJ, and Wright Medical Technologies, Inc, Arlington, TN, and receives royalties from Stryker Orthopaedics.

Each author certifies that his or her institution approved the human protocol for this investigation and that all investigations were conducted in conformity with ethical principles of research, and that informed consent for participation in the study was obtained.

About this article

Cite this article

Johnson, A.J., Zywiel, M.G., Stroh, D.A. et al. Should Gram Stains Have a Role in Diagnosing Hip Arthroplasty Infections?. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468, 2387–2391 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-1216-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11999-009-1216-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation