Is sonication superior to dithiothreitol in diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infections? A meta-analysis

Purpose Even though effective techniques in diagnosis of periprosthetic joint infections (PJIs) have been developed, the optimal modality has yet to be determined. The present meta-analysis aimed to compare the diagnostic accuracy of dithiothreitol (DTT) and sonication against the Musculoskeletal Infection Society criteria in patients undergoing revision joint surgery. Methods We searched the PubMed, Scopus, and Central Cochrane register of controlled trials as well as gray literature until the 9th of November, 2021. We included articles considering the comparative diagnostic accuracy of sonication and DTT in adult patients having revision hip and knee arthroplasty for septic or aseptic reasons. We calculated pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic accuracy of the above diagnostic techniques against the Musculoskeletal Infection Society (MSIS) criteria and created receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves to enable comparisons between each other. The quality of included papers was evaluated utilizing QUADAS-2 and QUADAS-C tools. Results Data from five comparative studies totaling 726 implants were pooled together. The diagnostic accuracy of DTT and sonication were 86.7% (95% CI 82.7 to 90.1) and 83.9% (95% CI 79.7 to 87.5), respectively. Pooled sensitivity and specificity showed no statistically significant differences between DTT and sonication (0.7 [95% CI 0.62 to 0.77] vs 0.72 [95% CI 0.65 to 0.78], p = 0.14; and 0.99 [95% CI 0.97 to 1] vs 0.97 [95% CI 0.93 to 0.99], p = 5.5, respectively). Conclusions This meta-analysis did not identify any clinically meaningful difference between the diagnostic potential of sonication and the chemical-based biofilm dislodgment methods. This finding remained robust after adjusting for the administration of antibiotics prophylaxis, implementation of the polymerase chain reaction of sonicated fluid, and study quality.