Back to all available

Albumin as a predictor of periprosthetic joint infection after total hip and knee arthroplasty: a postoperative inflammatory marker analysis

biochemistry
orthopedics
pathology

Abstract

Post-arthroplasty nutritional assessment and diagnosis of the periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) are critical for effective treatment and the health status of patients undergoing joint replacement surgery. Our study aimed to investigate the potential relationship between postoperative nutritional assessment and inflammatory response in postoperative patients. Albumin (ALB) is a key nutritional assessment indicator. The levels of C-reactive protein (CRP), erythrocyte sedimentation rates (ESR), white blood cell (WBC), neutrophilic granulate percentage (NEU), D-Dimer, and ALB in peripheral blood of patients were measured before the operation and for six consecutive days after total hip arthroplasty (THA) and total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and we further analyzed the correlation between ALB and other indicators. The ALB levels decreased significantly after THA and TKA operations, and there was a significant difference between the THA and TKA groups. Furthermore, ALB levels were closely related to the development of inflammation after surgery. Simultaneous detection of ALB and other inflammatory indicators can more accurately and sensitively reflect the inflammatory level and infection status of patients who have undergone THA and TKA postoperatively.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.
  • PeerJ does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].