ClinicalTrials.gg
Active, not recruitingNCT02143245Updated Apr 30, 2024

Diagnostic Accuracy of Synovial Biopsy for Implant-Related Shoulder Infections

An interventional study of Synovial Biopsy and Open Tissue Biopsy in Total Shoulder Arthroplasty, sponsored by Ottawa Hospital Research Institute. Active, not recruiting at 4 sites in Canada. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 90 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2024-04-30.

Sponsored by Ottawa Hospital Research Institute · Not applicable, Interventional, and Diagnostic

Phase
Not applicable
Study type
Interventional
Enrollment
118
Allocation
Not applicable
Ages
18 Years to 90 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

The purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy of retrieving tissue samples via an x-ray guided needle that is inserted into the infected tissue in the shoulder. The procedure using the guided needle is called a synovial biopsy versus an open tissue biopsy, which is done at the time of surgery. By doing the synovial biopsy prior to a revision surgery, the investigators hope to avoid more invasive intervention if it is not needed. Some patients may appear to have an infection but once the biopsy is taken and the results are read, there may not be an infection and therefore no need for a revision surgery.

Read the detailed description

The primary research objective is to assess the diagnostic accuracy of percutaneous synovial biopsy for detection of implant-related intra-articular shoulder infections (IISI).

The secondary objectives are to document the frequency of pain associated with shoulder synovial biopsy and to determine the correlation and agreement of several indices of infection as a means of providing preliminary evidence toward a clinical decision rule to rule in or rule out the diagnosis of implant-related intra-articular shoulder infection.

The third objective is to determine the rates of (re)infection, functional outcomes, and quality of life, over a two year follow up period following revision surgery.

The fourth objective is to determine whether an association exists between the biopsy location within the joint and relative yield and positive culture rates.

The fifth objective is to identify, develop, and validate tissue-specific biomarkers for the detection of IISI.

It is our hypothesis that synovial biopsy is valid tool for use in the diagnosis of shoulder arthroplasty and fracture implant related infections.

02

Conditions studied

  • Total Shoulder Arthroplasty

Keywords

  • Shoulder Infection
03

In context

Lead sponsor

Ottawa Hospital Research Institute is the lead sponsor of 544 studies on the registry; 97 are open to participants now.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 90 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  1. Previous shoulder surgery including hemiarthroplasty, total shoulder arthroplasty or reverse total shoulder arthroplasty, or internal fixation for shoulder fractures
  2. Suspicion of infection, including acute fever and complaints of pain and/or stiffness post operatively
  3. Revision shoulder surgery for patients described in (1)
  4. Provide consent

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  1. signs or symptoms of bacteremia or sepsis requiring urgent treatment, which would preclude the possibility of synovial biopsy
  2. Unable to speak or read English/French
  3. Psychiatric illness that precludes informed consent
05

Study design

Phase
Not applicable
Primary purpose
Diagnostic
Allocation
Not applicable
Intervention model
Single group
Masking
None (open label)
Enrollment
118 participants (actual)

Study arms

  • Other
    Revision Population

    The study population is both men and women who have had previous shoulder surgery with symptoms suggestive of deep infection. These include the presence of pain, stiffness, and radiologic signs of infection including implant lucencies or migration. Patients in this population will undergo a synovial biopsy, in addition to undergoing an open tissue biopsy at the time of their procedure. Diagnostic accuracy will be compared, and all participants will be tracked over time.

    Diagnostic Test: Synovial Biopsy · Diagnostic Test: Open Tissue Biopsy

Interventions

  • Diagnostic testSynovial Biopsy

    Synovial biopsy is a procedure using a guided needle, where 6 to 8 small tissue samples with be extracted from the shoulder using an x-ray guided needle.

  • Diagnostic testOpen Tissue Biopsy

    During the standard of care revision surgery, 6 to 8 small tissue samples will be taken in order to test for infection. This is standard of care treatment. As part of this study, an additional 1 to 2 samples of tissue would be taken in order to develop a test to determine more precisely what type of infection there may be.

06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Synovial Biopsy (test diagnostic) and Open Biopsy (reference standard)

    To assess the diagnostic accuracy of percutaneous synovial biopsy (test procedure) for detection of implant-related intraarticular shoulder infections (IISI), in comparison to direct macroscopic synovial biopsy, from either arthroscopic or open procedures (the reference standard). To address the primary objective, standard diagnostic accuracy statistics (sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, negative predictive value, likelihood ratio) will be derived, comparing lab results from percutaneous synovial biopsy specimen collection to those of the reference standard test (open/arthroscopic).

    Time frame: Pre-operatively.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Reported Pain

    Using a visual analog scale, participants will rank their pain level 24-hours after the synovial biopsy. 0 indicating no pain, and 10 indicating the worst pain. A higher score indicates a worse outcome.

    Time frame: 24-hours after biopsy.

Other outcomes

  1. Rates of Re-Infection

    Participants will be monitored for re-infection after their revision surgery for 5-years. Higher incidences of infection indicate a worse outcome.

    Time frame: Post-Operatively up to 5 years.

  2. Constant Score

    The Constant Score reflects an overall clinical functional assessment. This instrument is based on a 100-point scoring system. Subjective findings (pain, activities of daily living, and working in different positions) make up a total of 35 points. Objective measurements make up the remaining 65 points.The test is divided into four sub-categories: (1) pain is measured using 4 likert levels (15 points maximum), where a higher score indicates a better outcome; activities of daily living are measured using a likert scale, where a higher number indicates better outcomes (20 points maximum); mobility is measured by an assessor, and rated using a likert scale where a higher score indicates better outcomes (40 points maximum); finally, strength is measured by an assessor where 1 point is given per 0.5kg of force (maximum 25 points), a higher score indicates better outcomes. All categories are added together, and a total score out of 100 is given (higher score indicates better outcome).

    Time frame: Post-operatively up to 5-years.

  3. Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder (WOOS)

    The Western Ontario Osteoarthritis of the Shoulder Index (WOOS) is a disease specific evaluation, proven to be an accurate and valid assessment of function after shoulder replacement. The WOOS is a patient-reported measure, 19-question survey. Each question is measured using a visual analog scale rated from 0-100, where higher scores mean better outcome.

    Time frame: Post-operatively up to 5-years.

  4. American Shoulder and Elbow Surgeons (ASES)

    The ASES is a shoulder specific assessment divided into two sections: pain and activities of daily living (ADL). Pain is recorded on a visual analogue scale (0-10), lower scores indicate better outcomes. There are 10 activities of daily living questions, each are recorded on a 4 level likert scale (0-3), which a higher score indicates a better outcome. The overall score is an equal weight of the two sections and produces a score out of 100. The higher the score, the better the outcome.

    Time frame: Post-operatively up to 5-years.

  5. EQ-5D-5L

    The EQ-5D-5L quality of life questionnaire is a brief, easy to administer generic health status questionnaire, consisting of five dimensions (mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort, anxiety/depression) each of which can take one of five responses (each question rated 1-5), lower scores indicate better outcome. It also includes a visual analogue scale for recording an individual's rating of their current health-related quality of life (scale 0 to 100), where a higher score indicates a better outcome.

    Time frame: Post-operatively up to 5-years.

07

Study locations

4 sites
  • St. Joseph's Health Care London
    London, Ontario N6A 4V2, Canada
  • The Ottawa Hospital
    Ottawa, Ontario K1H8L6, Canada
  • Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre
    Toronto, Ontario M4N 3M5, Canada
  • Sacré-Coeur Hospital of Montreal
    Montreal, Quebec H4J 1C5, Canada
08

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Apr 30, 2024, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
09

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02143245
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
May 21, 2014
Start date
Jun 2014
Primary completion
Dec 2022
Completion
Dec 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Apr 30, 2024

Study contacts

Peter Lapner, MD
principal investigator · The Ottawa Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is active, not recruiting, as verified in Apr 2024. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion