ライフサイエンスコーパス: joint infection

1 atures, and treatment options for prosthetic joint infection.

2 e positivity for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection.

3 n aseptic prosthesis loosening and low-grade joint infection.

4 rimination of aseptic loosening vs low-grade joint infection.

5 rimination of aseptic loosening vs low-grade joint infection.

6 the formation of bacterial aggregates during joint infection.

7 more virulent in a nonhuman primate model of joint infection.

8 specificity for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection.

9 blished case of Coxiella burnetii prosthetic joint infection.

10 ignificant impact on incidence of prosthetic joint infection.

11 icant predictors of postoperative prosthetic joint infection.

12 ision arthroplasty and a previous prosthetic joint infection.

13 is an independent risk factor for prosthetic joint infection.

14 s had aseptic failure, and 79 had prosthetic-joint infection.

15 ve the microbiologic diagnosis of prosthetic-joint infection.

16 ined in 108 staphylococci causing prosthetic joint infection.

17 photopenia in the setting of acute bone and joint infection.

18 ward a potential novel approach for treating joint infections.

19 es and promising candidates for treatment of joint infections.

20 t Listeria monocytogenes-associated bone and joint infections.

21 sly reported cases of Actinomyces prosthetic joint infections.

22 ritis and an increasing number of prosthetic joint infections.

23 or the microbiologic diagnosis of prosthetic-joint infection among patients undergoing hip or knee re

24 lococcal isolates associated with prosthetic joint infection and 23 coagulase-negative staphylococci

25 dimentation rate in the diagnosis of bone or joint infection and in monitoring a patient's clinical r

26 ight into the pathogenesis of staphylococcal joint infection and the mechanisms underlying resistance

27 valuate potential risk factors of prosthetic joint infection and to clarify if RA is an independent p

28 detection system, for diagnosing prosthetic joint infection and to compare it with combined (111)In-

29 rgical debridement is typically required for joint infections and chronic osteomyelitis, whereas acut

30 luding native valve endocarditis, prosthetic joint infection, and intravascular catheter-related infe

31 n aseptic prosthesis loosening and low-grade joint infection, and which biomarker combinations are mo

32 Periprosthetic joint infections are a devastating complication after ar

33 ate-onset chronic (low-grade) periprosthetic joint infections are often accompanied by unspecific sym

34 hat are associated with wound and prosthetic joint infections as well bacteremia and empyema.

35 two-step model of staphylococcal prosthetic joint infection: As we previously reported, interaction

36 3) of arthroplasty-associated non-prosthetic joint infection-associated coagulase-negative staphyloco

37 ither arthroplasty-associated non-prosthetic joint infection-associated isolates (e.g., Staphylococcu

38 mplications for the management of prosthetic joint infections, because treatment strategies depend on

39 or the microbiologic diagnosis of prosthetic-joint infection, but this method is neither sensitive no

40 approach, we show that individual as well as joint infection by RSV and PIV can be specifically preve

41 We report the first case of a prosthetic joint infection caused by Gemella sanguinis.

42 We describe a case of prosthetic joint infection due to a previously undescribed organism

43 the first reported case of a prosthetic hip joint infection due to Campylobacter coli.

44 he first case of a patient with a prosthetic joint infection due to Oerskovia xanthineolytica.

45 When targeting both viruses in a joint infection, excess of one siRNA moderated the inhib

46 tant Staphylococcus aureus, a major cause of joint infections, forms exceptionally strong biofilmlike

47 s identified an increased risk of prosthetic joint infections (HR 4.08, 95% CI 1.35-12.33) in patient

48 However, the RecA mutant was attenuated for joint infection in competitive-infection assays with the

49 i DNA in SF is not a reliable test of active joint infection in Lyme disease.

50 97 included two large, multi-year surveys of joint infection in patients from defined European health

51 diabetic pedal osteomyelitis and prosthetic joint infection is not established.

52 Prosthetic joint infection is one of the most dreaded complications

53 The pathogenesis of joint infections is not well understood.

54 All Staphylococcus aureus prosthetic joint infection isolates (n = 55) were icaA positive.

55 coagulase-negative staphylococcal prosthetic joint infection isolates were icaA positive, and 30% (7

56 diabetic pedal osteomyelitis and prosthetic joint infection, it is not useful for spondylodiskitis.

57 Bone and joint infection, mainly caused by Staphylococcus aureus,

58 Conversely, false diagnosis of joint infection may result in multistage revision proced

59 In prosthetic-joint infection, microorganisms are typically present in

60 calized epidural, paraspinal, and peripheral joint infections occurred.

61 95% CI] 1.02-8.75) and a previous prosthetic joint infection of the replaced joint (HR 5.49, 95% CI 1

62 te infections in general, and periprosthetic joint infections particularly, has prompted implementati

63 amples were classified as showing prosthetic joint infection (PJI) and aseptic failure (AF), respecti

64 f these, 152 and 279 subjects had prosthetic joint infection (PJI) and aseptic failure, respectively.

65 bial etiology of culture-negative prosthetic joint infection (PJI) can be challenging.

66 eported case of Ureaplasma parvum prosthetic joint infection (PJI) detected by PCR.

67 onstrated improved sensitivity of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis using an automated blood

68 onstrated improved sensitivity of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis using an automated blood

69 sensitive than tissue culture for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis.

70 R has been previously studied for prosthetic joint infection (PJI) diagnosis; however, few studies ha

71 The primary outcome was prosthetic joint infection (PJI) in the first postoperative year.

72 Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is one of the most dreading compli

73 Accurate and rapid diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) is vital for rational and effectiv

74 g the prognosis of staphylococcal prosthetic joint infection (PJI) managed with debridement, antibiot

75 Treatment of prosthetic joint infection (PJI) usually requires surgical replacem

76 species are occasional causes of prosthetic joint infection (PJI), but few data are available on the

77 des for bone infection, including prosthetic joint infection (PJI), often in combination with rifampi

78 re not an infrequent cause of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI).

79 ionals who care for patients with prosthetic joint infection (PJI).

80 cognized as an important agent of prosthetic joint infection (PJI).

81 ly being recognized as a cause of prosthetic joint infection (PJI).

82 for microbiological diagnosis of prosthetic joint infections (PJI).

83 ureus is a leading cause of human prosthetic joint infections (PJIs) typified by biofilm formation.

84 of care for surgical revision in prosthetic joint infections (PJIs).

85 Joint infections remain an uncommon complication of immu

86 additional cases of Campylobacter prosthetic joint infection reported in the literature are reviewed.

87 anisms involved in bone loss during bone and joint infection, suggesting that osteoclasts could be a

88 nmicrobiologic criteria to define prosthetic-joint infection, the sensitivities of periprosthetic-tis

89 ation for the reported extreme resistance of joint infection to antibiotic treatment, lend support to

90 l Tract, Intraabdominal Infections, Bone and Joint Infections, Urinary Tract Infections, Genital Infe

91 on of potential risk factors with prosthetic joint infection was examined using Cox models.

92 Bone or joint infection was most common with 348 cases (32.4%),

93 eus HysA on biofilm-like aggregates found in joint infections was examined.

94 uid cultures for the diagnosis of prosthetic joint infection were 54% and 75%, whereas the specificit

95 Fourteen cases of prosthetic-joint infection were detected by sonicate-fluid culture

96 lacement are at increased risk of prosthetic joint infection, which is further increased in the setti

97 ccus aureus is a leading cause of prosthetic joint infections, which, as we recently showed, proceed

98 Of 328 patients without peripheral-joint infection who were included in this investigation,

99 ia retains a nearly unique susceptibility to joint infection with mycoplasmas, which can cause consid

100 ld be considered in patients with prosthetic joint infection without an identified pathogen.