-
Cureus Oct 2021Fournier's gangrene (FG) is a perineal and abdominal necrotizing infection. It is most commonly found in middle-aged men with comorbidities such as diabetes... (Review)
Review
Fournier's gangrene (FG) is a perineal and abdominal necrotizing infection. It is most commonly found in middle-aged men with comorbidities such as diabetes mellitus. Initial symptoms are often indistinct and can rapidly progress to overwhelming infections with a relatively high mortality rate. It is crucial to make a prompt diagnosis so that the patient receives appropriate treatment. Given the importance of the identification of FG, we explored what were the most common signs and symptoms associated with FG, as well as distinguished the gold standard treatment. This systematic review utilized articles identified exclusively through PubMed using key terms such as Fournier's gangrene, signs, symptoms, and treatment. A total of 37 studies, including a total of 3,224 patients (3,093 males and 131 females), fit our inclusion parameters for relevance that included either the most identifiable presentation of FG or the most effective treatment. From our search, the most common clinical presentation was scrotal and labial pain, fever, abscesses, crepitus, erythema, and cellulitis. Diagnosis is made from clinical findings in conjunction with imaging. The gold standard for treatment was found to be a combination of surgical debridement, broad-spectrum antibiotics, and the administration of intravenous fluids. Further, patient survival was found to be directly related to the time from diagnosis to treatment when they underwent surgical debridement. The importance of early identification for improved outcomes or survival highlights the need for further studies or measures to enhance the identification of the signs and symptoms of FG.
PubMed: 34815897
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.18948 -
The British Journal of Oral &... Jul 2021Surgical site infections are a complication of oral and maxillofacial procedures, with the potential for significant morbidity and mortality. Use of preoperative,... (Review)
Review
Surgical site infections are a complication of oral and maxillofacial procedures, with the potential for significant morbidity and mortality. Use of preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative antibiotic prophylaxis to reduce the incidence of surgical site infections must be balanced with considerations of a patients' risk of antibiotic-related adverse events. This review aimed to provide evidence-based recommendations for antibiotic prophylaxis. Searches were conducted using MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and PUBMED for maxillofacial procedures including: treatment of dental abscesses, extractions, implants, trauma, temporomandibular joints, orthognathics, malignant and benign tumour removal, and bone grafting, limited to articles published since 2000. A total of 98 out of 280 retrieved papers were included in the final analysis. Systematic reviews were assessed using AMSTAR criteria. Randomised controlled trials were assessed for bias using Cochrane Collaborative tools. The overall quality of evidence was assessed using GRADE. Prophylactic antibiotic use is recommended in surgical extractions of third molars, comminuted mandibular fractures, temporomandibular joint replacements, clean-contaminated tumour removal, and complex implants. Prophylactic antibiotic use is not routinely recommended in fractures of the upper or midface facial thirds. Further research is required to provide recommendations in orthognathic, cleft lip, palate, temporomandibular joint surgery, and maxillofacial surgical procedures in medically-compromised patients.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Antibiotic Prophylaxis; Humans; Molar, Third; Surgery, Oral; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 34016464
DOI: 10.1016/j.bjoms.2020.09.020 -
Annals of Internal Medicine Mar 2022The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations on the diagnosis and management of acute left-sided colonic...
DESCRIPTION
The American College of Physicians (ACP) developed this guideline to provide clinical recommendations on the diagnosis and management of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis in adults. This guideline is based on current best available evidence about benefits and harms, taken in the context of costs and patient values and preferences.
METHODS
The ACP Clinical Guidelines Committee (CGC) developed this guideline based on a systematic review on the use of computed tomography (CT) for the diagnosis of acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis and on management via hospitalization, antibiotic use, and interventional percutaneous abscess drainage. The systematic review evaluated outcomes that the CGC rated as critical or important. This guideline was developed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) methodology.
TARGET AUDIENCE AND PATIENT POPULATION
The target audience is all clinicians, and the target patient population is adults with suspected or known acute left-sided colonic diverticulitis.
RECOMMENDATION 1
RECOMMENDATION 2
RECOMMENDATION 3
Topics: Adult; Diverticulitis, Colonic; Hospitalization; Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Physicians; United States
PubMed: 35038273
DOI: 10.7326/M21-2710 -
Current Issues in Molecular Biology May 2023Hidradenitis suppurativa is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that affects the hair follicles in areas of the body with apocrine glands. The condition is... (Review)
Review
Hidradenitis suppurativa is a chronic inflammatory skin condition that affects the hair follicles in areas of the body with apocrine glands. The condition is characterized by recurrent, painful nodules, abscesses, and draining sinuses that can lead to scarring and disfigurement. In this present study, we provide a focused evaluation of recent developments in hidradenitis suppurativa research, including novel therapeutics and promising biomarkers that may facilitate clinical diagnosis and treatment. We conducted a systematic review of controlled trials, randomized controlled trials, meta-analyses, case reports, and Cochrane Review articles in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. The Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, and Epistemonikos databases were queried via Title/Abstract screen. Eligibility criteria included the following: (1) has a primary focus on hidradenitis suppurativa, (2) includes measurable outcomes data with robust comparators, (3) details the sample population, (4) English language, and (5) archived as full-text journal articles. A total of 42 eligible articles were selected for review. Qualitative evaluation identified numerous developments in our understanding of the disease's multiple potential etiologies, pathophysiology, and treatment options. It is important for individuals with hidradenitis suppurativa to work closely with a healthcare provider to develop a comprehensive treatment plan that addresses their individual needs and goals. To meet this objective, providers must keep current with developments in the genetic, immunological, microbiological, and environmental factors contributing to the disease's development and progression.
PubMed: 37232749
DOI: 10.3390/cimb45050280 -
American Journal of Obstetrics &... Jul 2022Pelvic inflammatory disease during pregnancy is a rare and an understudied occurrence with potential negative outcomes. (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Pelvic inflammatory disease during pregnancy is a rare and an understudied occurrence with potential negative outcomes.
OBJECTIVE
This study aimed to evaluate the outcomes of pregnant women with pelvic inflammatory disease with or without pelvic abscesses.
DATA SOURCES
We performed a systematic review of the literature using Ovid MEDLINE, Scopus, CINAHL, and PubMed (including Cochrane) with no time limitations.
STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Relevant studies on pelvic inflammatory disease during pregnancy were identified and considered eligible if they described at least 1 case of pelvic inflammatory disease after conception, defined as infection in one or more of the following: uterus, fallopian tubes, and ovaries; based on clinical findings, physical examination, and imaging with or without pelvic abscesses present. Only studies on pelvic inflammatory disease with or without tubo-ovarian abscesses during pregnancy that evaluated perinatal outcomes were included. Data on the risk factors, delivery methods, and maternal, fetal, and neonatal outcomes were collected.
METHODS
Reviewers screened all relevant titles using the inclusion/exclusion criteria and selected relevant articles for appraisal. A total of 49 cases with reported pelvic inflammatory disease, pelvic abscesses, or both were included.
RESULTS
After exclusion of articles that did not meet the inclusion criteria, 34 manuscripts describing the occurrence of pelvic inflammatory disease in 49 pregnancies were analyzed, focusing primarily on cases reported after 1971. The mean age of patients was 25±6.3 years, the mean gestational age at diagnosis was 19.0±10.3 weeks, and 67.6% of patients were multiparous. Of all included patients, 27 (62.8%) underwent exploratory laparotomies, 14 (32.6%) underwent unilateral salpingo-oophorectomies, and 11 (25.6%) underwent appendectomies. Of all the deliveries, 13 (50%) pregnancies were full term, 14 (53.8%) were cesarean deliveries, 10 (38.5%) were spontaneous vaginal deliveries, and 2 (7.7%) were cesarean hysterectomies. There were 26 (60.5%) cases of viable births (mean gestational age at delivery, 33.8±5.1 weeks) and 17 (39.5%) cases of nonviable births. Sepsis was a complication in 3 (7.0%) cases and caused 3 neonatal deaths.
CONCLUSION
Although rare, pelvic inflammatory disease can have severe health consequences. Risk factors for pelvic inflammatory disease development include maternal pelvic structural anomalies, a history of sexually transmitted infections, recent pelvic surgery, and in vitro fertilization or oocyte retrieval. Pelvic inflammatory disease can coincide with pregnancy and can occur in the second trimester. Making a prompt diagnosis can help to improve the outcomes; therefore, if a high enough suspicion exists, treatment should not be delayed.
Topics: Abscess; Cesarean Section; Female; Gestational Age; Humans; Parturition; Pelvic Inflammatory Disease; Pregnancy
PubMed: 35405372
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajogmf.2022.100643 -
International Journal of Molecular... Feb 2023The use of neuraxial procedures, such as spinal and epidural anaesthesia, has been linked to some possible complications. In addition, spinal cord injuries due to... (Review)
Review
The use of neuraxial procedures, such as spinal and epidural anaesthesia, has been linked to some possible complications. In addition, spinal cord injuries due to anaesthetic practice (Anaes-SCI) are rare events but remain a significant concern for many patients undergoing surgery. This systematic review aimed to identify high-risk patients summarise the causes, consequences, and management/recommendations of SCI due to neuraxial techniques in anaesthesia. A comprehensive search of the literature was conducted in accordance with Cochrane recommendations, and inclusion criteria were applied to identify relevant studies. From the 384 studies initially screened, 31 were critically appraised, and the data were extracted and analysed. The results of this review suggest that the main risk factors reported were extremes of age, obesity, and diabetes. Anaes-SCI was reported as a consequence of hematoma, trauma, abscess, ischemia, and infarction, among others. As a result, mainly motor deficits, sensory loss, and pain were reported. Many authors reported delayed treatments to resolve Anaes-SCI. Despite the potential complications, neuraxial techniques are still one of the best options for opioid-sparing pain prevention and management, reducing patients' morbidity, improving outcomes, reducing the length of hospital stay, and pain chronification, with a consequent economic benefit. The main findings of this review highlight the importance of careful patient management and close monitoring during neuraxial anaesthesia procedures to minimise the risk of spinal cord injury and complications.
Topics: Humans; Anesthesia, Spinal; Anesthesia, Epidural; Spinal Cord Injuries; Pain
PubMed: 36902095
DOI: 10.3390/ijms24054665 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Sep 2020Despite the health benefits of breastfeeding, initiation and duration rates continue to fall short of international guidelines. Many factors influence a woman's decision... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Despite the health benefits of breastfeeding, initiation and duration rates continue to fall short of international guidelines. Many factors influence a woman's decision to wean; the main reason cited for weaning is associated with lactation complications, such as mastitis. Mastitis is an inflammation of the breast, with or without infection. It can be viewed as a continuum of disease, from non-infective inflammation of the breast to infection that may lead to abscess formation.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness of preventive strategies (for example, breastfeeding education, pharmacological treatments and alternative therapies) on the occurrence or recurrence of non-infective or infective mastitis in breastfeeding women post-childbirth.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched Cochrane Pregnancy and Childbirth's Trials Register, ClinicalTrials.gov, the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) (3 October 2019), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials of interventions for preventing mastitis in postpartum breastfeeding women. Quasi-randomised controlled trials and trials reported only in abstract form were eligible. We attempted to contact the authors to obtain any unpublished results, wherever possible. Interventions for preventing mastitis may include: probiotics, specialist breastfeeding advice and holistic approaches. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 10 trials (3034 women). Nine trials (2395 women) contributed data. Generally, the trials were at low risk of bias in most domains but some were high risk for blinding, attrition bias, and selective reporting. Selection bias (allocation concealment) was generally unclear. The certainty of evidence was downgraded due to risk of bias and to imprecision (low numbers of women participating in the trials). Conflicts of interest on the part of trial authors, and the involvement of industry funders may also have had an impact on the certainty of the evidence. Most trials reported our primary outcome of incidence of mastitis but there were almost no data relating to adverse effects, breast pain, duration of breastfeeding, nipple damage, breast abscess or recurrence of mastitis. Probiotics versus placebo Probiotics may reduce the risk of mastitis more than placebo (risk ratio (RR) 0.51, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.35 to 0.75; 2 trials; 399 women; low-certainty evidence). It is uncertain if probiotics reduce the risk of breast pain or nipple damage because the certainty of evidence is very low. Results for the biggest of these trials (639 women) are currently unavailable due to a contractual agreement between the probiotics supplier and the trialists. Adverse effects were reported in one trial, where no woman in either group experienced any adverse effects. Antibiotics versus placebo or usual care The risk of mastitis may be similar between antibiotics and usual care or placebo (RR 0.37, 95% CI 0.10 to 1.34; 3 trials; 429 women; low-certainty evidence). The risk of mastitis may be similar between antibiotics and fusidic acid ointment (RR 0.22, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.81; 1 trial; 36 women; low-certainty evidence) or mupirocin ointment (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.05 to 3.89; 1 trial; 44 women; low-certainty evidence) but we are uncertain due to the wide CIs. None of the trials reported adverse effects. Topical treatments versus breastfeeding advice The risk of mastitis may be similar between fusidic acid ointment and breastfeeding advice (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.22; 1 trial; 40 women; low-certainty evidence) and mupirocin ointment and breastfeeding advice (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.35; 1 trial; 48 women; low-certainty evidence) but we are uncertain due to the wide CIs. One trial (42 women) compared topical treatments to each other. The risk of mastitis may be similar between fusidic acid and mupirocin (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.00; low-certainty evidence) but we are uncertain due to the wide CIs. Adverse events were not reported. Specialist breastfeeding education versus usual care The risk of mastitis (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.17 to 4.95; 1 trial; 203 women; low-certainty evidence) and breast pain (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.36 to 2.37; 1 trial; 203 women; low-certainty evidence) may be similar but we are uncertain due to the wide CIs. Adverse events were not reported. Anti-secretory factor-inducing cereal versus standard cereal The risk of mastitis (RR 0.24, 95% CI 0.03 to 1.72; 1 trial; 29 women; low-certainty evidence) and recurrence of mastitis (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.03 to 4.57; 1 trial; 7 women; low-certainty evidence) may be similar but we are uncertain due to the wide CIs. Adverse events were not reported. Acupoint massage versus routine care Acupoint massage probably reduces the risk of mastitis compared to routine care (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.19 to 0.78;1 trial; 400 women; moderate-certainty evidence) and breast pain (RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.23; 1 trial; 400 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Adverse events were not reported. Breast massage and low frequency pulse treatment versus routine care Breast massage and low frequency pulse treatment may reduce risk of mastitis (RR 0.03, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.21; 1 trial; 300 women; low-certainty evidence). Adverse events were not reported.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There is some evidence that acupoint massage is probably better than routine care, probiotics may be better than placebo, and breast massage and low frequency pulse treatment may be better than routine care for preventing mastitis. However, it is important to note that we are aware of at least one large trial investigating probiotics whose results have not been made public, therefore, the evidence presented here is incomplete. The available evidence regarding other interventions, including breastfeeding education, pharmacological treatments and alternative therapies, suggests these may be little better than routine care for preventing mastitis but our conclusions are uncertain due to the low certainty of the evidence. Future trials should recruit sufficiently large numbers of women in order to detect clinically important differences between interventions and results of future trials should be made publicly available.
Topics: Anti-Bacterial Agents; Bias; Breast Feeding; Edible Grain; Female; Fusidic Acid; Humans; Massage; Mastitis; Mupirocin; Neuropeptides; Ointments; Patient Education as Topic; Placebos; Probiotics; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 32987448
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD007239.pub4 -
BJOG : An International Journal of... May 2020No consensus on the management of symptomatic cysts or abscesses of the Bartholin's gland exists.
BACKGROUND
No consensus on the management of symptomatic cysts or abscesses of the Bartholin's gland exists.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the effectiveness and safety of surgical interventions for a symptomatic Bartholin's cyst or abscess.
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched bibliographical databases from inception to April 2019.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised trials evaluating a surgical intervention for the treatment of a symptomatic Bartholin's cyst or abscess.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Eight trials, reporting data from 699 women, were included. Study characteristics and methodological quality were recorded for each trial. Summary estimates were calculated using random-effects methods.
MAIN RESULTS
When considering the recurrence of a symptomatic Bartholin's cyst or abscess, the evidence was consistent with notable effects in either direction (risk ratio [RR] 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.41-1.40) when comparing marsupialisation with incision, drainage and insertion of a Word catheter. Limited inference could be made when comparing marsupialisation with incision, drainage and silver nitrate insertion (RR 1.00; 95% CI 0.57-1.75), and incision, drainage and cavity closure (RR 0.25; 95% CI 0.01-4.89). There was limited reporting of secondary outcomes, including haematoma, infectious morbidity and persistent dyspareunia.
CONCLUSIONS
Current randomised trial evidence does not support the use of any single surgical intervention for the treatment of a symptomatic cyst or abscess of the Bartholin's gland.
PROSPECTIVE REGISTRATION
PROSPERO: International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews; CRD42018088553.
TWEETABLE ABSTRACT
Further research is needed to identify an effective treatment for #Bartholin's cyst or abscess. @jamesmnduffy.
Topics: Ablation Techniques; Abscess; Bartholin's Glands; Cysts; Drainage; Female; Gynecologic Surgical Procedures; Humans; Needs Assessment; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Vulvar Diseases
PubMed: 31876985
DOI: 10.1111/1471-0528.16079 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2021Hair has traditionally been removed from the surgical site before surgery; however, some studies claim that this increases surgical site infections (SSIs) and should be... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Hair has traditionally been removed from the surgical site before surgery; however, some studies claim that this increases surgical site infections (SSIs) and should be avoided. This is the second update of a review published in 2006 and first updated in 2011.
OBJECTIVES
To determine whether routine preoperative hair removal (compared with no removal) and the method, timing, or setting of hair removal effect SSI rates.
SEARCH METHODS
In November 2019, for this second update we searched the Cochrane Wounds Specialised Register; the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (the Cochrane Library); Ovid MEDLINE (including In-Process & Other Non-Indexed Citations); Ovid Embase; and EBSCO CINAHL Plus. We also searched clinical trial registries for ongoing and unpublished studies, and scanned the reference lists of included studies plus reviews to identify additional studies. We applied no date or language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included randomised controlled trials or quasi-randomised trials that compared: · hair removal with no hair removal; · different methods of hair removal; and · hair removal at different times before surgery.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently assessed the relevance of each study. Data were extracted independently by both review authors and cross-checked. We carried out 'Risk of bias' assessment using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool and assessed the certainty of evidence according to GRADE. Sensitivity analyses excluding studies at high risk of bias were conducted.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 11 new studies in this update resulting in a total of 19 randomised and 6 quasi-randomised trials (8919 participants). Clipping compared with no hair removal Low certainty evidence suggests there may be little difference in risk of SSI when no hair removal is compared with hair removal using clippers (risk ratio (RR) 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.39; three studies with 1733 participants). Shaving with a razor compared with no hair removal Moderate certainty evidence suggests the risk of SSI is probably increased in participants who have hair removal with a razor compared with no removal (RR 1.82, 95% CI 1.05 to 3.14; seven studies with 1706 participants). In terms of absolute risk this represents 17 more SSIs per 1000 in the razor group compared with the no hair removal group (95% CI 1 more to 45 more SSI in the razor group). Based on low-certainty evidence, it is unclear whether there is a difference in stitch abscesses between hair removal with a razor and no hair removal (1 trial with 80 participants; RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.21 to 4.66). Based on narrative data from one trial with 136 participants, there may be little difference in length of hospital stay between participants having hair removed with a razor compared with those having no hair removal (low-certainty evidence). Based on narrative data from one trial with 278 participants, it is uncertain whether there is a difference in cost between participants having hair removed by shaving with a razor compared with no hair removal (very low certainty evidence). Depilatory cream compared with no hair removal Low certainty evidence suggests there may be little difference in SSI risk between depilatory cream or no hair removal, although there are were wide confidence intervals around the point estimate that included benefit and harm (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.45 to 2.31; low-certainty evidence; 1 trial with 267 participants). Based on narrative data from one trial with 267 participants, it is uncertain whether there is a difference in cost between participants having hair removed with depilatory cream compared with no hair removal (very low certainty evidence). Shaving with a razor compared with clipping Moderate-certainty evidence from 7 studies with 3723 participants suggests the risk of SSI is probably increased by shaving with a razor compared with clipping (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.16 to 2.33). Moderate-certainty evidence suggests the risk of skin injury is probably increased in people who have hair removal with a razor rather than clipping (3 trials with 1333 participants; RR 1.74, CI 95% 1.12 to 2.71). Shaving with a razor compared with depilatory cream Moderate-certainty evidence from 9 studies with 1593 participants suggests there is probably more SSI risk when razors are used compared with depilatory cream (RR 2.28, 95% CI 1.12 to 4.65). Low-certainty evidence suggests the risk of skin injury may be increased when using a razor rather than depilatory cream for hair removal (RR 6.95, CI 95% 3.45 to 13.98; 5 trials with 937 participants). Based on narrative data from three trials with 402 participants, it is uncertain whether depilatory cream is more expensive than shaving (very low certainty evidence). Hair removal on the day of surgery compared with one-day preoperatively Low-certainty evidence suggests that there may be a small reduction in SSI risk when hair is removed on the day of surgery compared with the day before surgery although there are were wide confidence intervals around the point estimate that included benefit and harm (one trial, 977 participants; RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.54 to 1.30).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Compared with no hair removal, there may be little difference in risk of SSI when clippers or depilatory cream are used (low-certainty evidence). However, there are probably fewer SSIs when hair is not removed compared with shaving with a razor (moderate-certainty evidence). If hair has to be removed, moderate-certainty evidence suggests using clippers or depilatory cream probably results in fewer SSIs and other complications compared with shaving using a razor. There may be a small reduction in SSIs when hair is removed on the day of, rather than the day before, surgery.
Topics: Hair Removal; Humans; Surgical Wound Infection
PubMed: 34437723
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004122.pub5