{rfName}
PC

Indexed in

License and use

Citations

284

Altmetrics

Grant support

This work was funded by the Spanish Ministry of Science (FUNCOAT-CSD2008-00023), Comunidad de Madrid (S2009/MAT-1472), and Capio Research Foundation (2009-1694). Comunidad de Madrid funded GDP, AOP, and NAR. FundaciOn Conchita Rabago-de-Jimenez-Daz funded DMM.

Analysis of institutional authors

Esteban Moreno, JaimeAuthorFernandez Roblas, RicardoAuthorCordero Ampuero, JoseAuthorGomez Barrena, EnriqueAuthor
Share
Publications
>
Article

PCR-hybridization after sonication improves diagnosis of implant-related infection

Publicated to:Acta Orthopaedica. 83 (3): 299-304 - 2012-06-01 83(3), DOI: 10.3109/17453674.2012.693019

Authors: Esteban, Jaime; Alonso-Rodriguez, Noelia; del-Prado, Gema; Ortiz-Perez, Alberto; Molina-Manso, Diana; Cordero-Ampuero, Jose; Sandoval, Enrique; Fernandez-Roblas, Ricardo; Gomez-Barrena, Enrique;

Affiliations

Universidad Autónoma de Madrid - Author
‎ Hosp Univ La Princesa, Dept Orthoped, Madrid, Spain - Author
‎ IdiPaz Hosp La Paz, Dept Orthoped, Madrid, Spain - Author
‎ IIS Fdn Jimenez Diaz, Bone & Joint Infect Unit, Madrid, Spain - Author
‎ IIS Fdn Jimenez Diaz, Dept Clin Microbiol, Madrid, Spain - Author
‎ IIS Fdn Jimenez Diaz, Dept Orthoped, Madrid, Spain - Author
See more

Abstract

Purpose We wanted to improve the diagnosis of implant-related infection using molecular biological techniques after sonication. Methods We studied 258 retrieved implant components (185 prosthetic implants and 73 osteosynthesis implants) from 126 patients. 47 patients had a clinical diagnosis of infection (108 components) and 79 patients did not (150 components). The fluids from sonication of retrieved implants were tested in culture and were also analyzed using a modified commercial PCR kit for detection of Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria (Geno-Type BC; Hain Lifescience) after extraction of the DNA. Results 38 of 47 patients with a clinical diagnosis of infection were also diagnosed as being infected using culture and/or PCR (35 by culture alone). Also, 24 patients of the 79 cases with no clinical diagnosis of infection were identified microbiologically as being infected (4 by culture, 16 by PCR, and 4 by both culture and PCR). Comparing culture and PCR, positive culture results were obtained in 28 of the 79 patients and positive PCR results were obtained in 35. There were 21 discordant results in patients who were originally clinically diagnosed as being infected and 28 discordant results in patients who had no clinical diagnosis of infection. Interpretation For prosthetic joint infections and relative to culture, molecular detection can increase (by one tenth) the number of patients diagnosed as having an infection. Positive results from patients who have no clinical diagnosis of infection must be interpreted carefully.

Keywords
AmplificationBacteriaCultureFluidHipIdentificationOrthopedic infectionsProsthetic joint infectionRevision arthroplastyRibosomal-rna gene

Quality index

Bibliometric impact. Analysis of the contribution and dissemination channel

The work has been published in the journal Acta Orthopaedica due to its progression and the good impact it has achieved in recent years, according to the agency WoS (JCR), it has become a reference in its field. In the year of publication of the work, 2012, it was in position 10/65, thus managing to position itself as a Q1 (Primer Cuartil), in the category Orthopedics.

From a relative perspective, and based on the normalized impact indicator calculated from World Citations provided by WoS (ESI, Clarivate), it yields a value for the citation normalization relative to the expected citation rate of: 3.02. This indicates that, compared to works in the same discipline and in the same year of publication, it ranks as a work cited above average. (source consulted: ESI Nov 14, 2024)

This information is reinforced by other indicators of the same type, which, although dynamic over time and dependent on the set of average global citations at the time of their calculation, consistently position the work at some point among the top 50% most cited in its field:

  • Weighted Average of Normalized Impact by the Scopus agency: 2.48 (source consulted: FECYT Feb 2024)
  • Field Citation Ratio (FCR) from Dimensions: 15.72 (source consulted: Dimensions May 2025)

Specifically, and according to different indexing agencies, this work has accumulated citations as of 2025-05-02, the following number of citations:

  • WoS: 62
  • Scopus: 70
  • Europe PMC: 48
  • Google Scholar: 104
  • OpenCitations: 74
Impact and social visibility

From the perspective of influence or social adoption, and based on metrics associated with mentions and interactions provided by agencies specializing in calculating the so-called "Alternative or Social Metrics," we can highlight as of 2025-05-02:

  • The use, from an academic perspective evidenced by the Altmetric agency indicator referring to aggregations made by the personal bibliographic manager Mendeley, gives us a total of: 52.
  • The use of this contribution in bookmarks, code forks, additions to favorite lists for recurrent reading, as well as general views, indicates that someone is using the publication as a basis for their current work. This may be a notable indicator of future more formal and academic citations. This claim is supported by the result of the "Capture" indicator, which yields a total of: 52 (PlumX).

With a more dissemination-oriented intent and targeting more general audiences, we can observe other more global scores such as:

  • The Total Score from Altmetric: 3.

It is essential to present evidence supporting full alignment with institutional principles and guidelines on Open Science and the Conservation and Dissemination of Intellectual Heritage. A clear example of this is:

  • The work has been submitted to a journal whose editorial policy allows open Open Access publication.