Journals / Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi / 2012 / Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 1

Fournier gangreninde debridman sayısını etkileyen faktörler: 36 olguda sonuçlarımız

Factors affecting the number of debridements in Fournier’s gangrene: Our results in 36 cases

Pages
43–48
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Our overall mortality rate was 11% (Group I: 4.8% vs Group II: 20%; p=0.287).

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:BACKGROUND We aimed to evaluate the factors potentially affecting the number of surgical debridements in patients with Fournier’s gangrene (FG) who underwent single or multiple operative sessions.
📊
Key Findings & Data:METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the data of 36 patients with FG.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Our overall mortality rate was 11% (Group I: 4.8% vs Group II: 20%; p=0.287).
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

BACKGROUND We aimed to evaluate the factors potentially affecting the number of surgical debridements in patients with Fournier&#8217;s gangrene (FG) who underwent single or multiple operative sessions. METHODS We retrospectively reviewed the data of 36 patients with FG. The patients were assigned to one of two groups according to the number of debridements (Group I: single session; Group II: &#8805;2 sessions). Data of the patients (clinical and surgical data, lesion characteristics, FG severity index, and prognosis) were compared between the groups. RESULTS The mean age of the patients was 55.5 years, and all were male. Group I consisted of 21 patients and Group II of 15 patients. The mean number of debridements was 2.2 in Group II. Our overall mortality rate was 11% (Group I: 4.8% vs Group II: 20%; p=0.287). Diabetes was the most common coexistent pathology (44%). Time to admission to the clinic, size of the lesions at admission, and FG Severity Index (FGSI) scores of the groups were similar. In Group II, FGSI scores were found increased before each of the repeated debridement sessions (p<0.05). CONCLUSION There was no difference in the clinical data of the patients who required single or multiple debridement sessions; however, FGSI may be useful in deciding repeated debridements, as it was found increased at each repeated session.

Özet

AMAÇ Bu çalışmada, tek veya çok sayıda cerrahi debridman gereken Fournier gangreni (FG) hastaları karşılaştırıldı, debridman sayısını etkileyebilecek faktörler araştırıldı. GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM Fournier gangreni nedeniyle tedavi edilen 36 hastanın verileri geriye dönük olarak incelendi. Hastalar uygulanan debridman sayısına göre iki gruba ayrıldı (Grup I: tek seans; Grup II: ≥2 seans). Hastalara ait veriler (klinik ve cerrahi veriler, lezyon özellikleri, FG şiddet indeksi, prognoz verileri) gruplar arasında karşılaştırıldı. BULGULAR Hastaların ortalama yaşı 55,5 idi ve hepsi erkekti. Grup I’de 21, Grup II’de 15 hasta incelendi. Grup II’de ortalama debridman sayısı 2,2 idi. Genel mortalite oranı %11 olarak saptandı (Grup I’de %4,8, Grup II’de %20; p=0,287). Diyabet en sık karşılaşılan komorbidite idi (%44). Hastaneye başvuruya kadar geçen süre, başvuru sırasında lezyonun boyutu ve FG şiddet indeksi açısından gruplar arasında fark tespit edilmedi. Grup II’de FG şiddet indeksi skorunun tekrarlanan her operasyon öncesinde anlamlı derecede artış gösterdiği saptandı (p<0,05). SONUÇ Her ne kadar tek veya çok sayıda debridman uygulanan hastalar arasında debridman sayısını etkileyebilecek anlamlı fark saptanmamışsa da; FG şiddet indeksi, tekrarlanan her debridmanda arttığı tespit edildiği için, ilave debridmanlara karar vermede yardımcı olabilir.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÖKTAŞ, C., YILDIRIM, M., HORUZ, R., FAYDACI, G., AKÇA, O., ÇETİNEL, C. A. (2012). Fournier gangreninde debridman sayısını etkileyen faktörler: 36 olguda sonuçlarımız. Ulusal Travma ve Acil Cerrahi Dergisi, Cilt: 18 - Sayı: 1, 43–48. https://ajindex.com/articles/324180

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Sorensen MD, Krieger JN, Rivara FP, Klein MB, Wessells H. Fournier’s gangrene: management and mortality predictors in a population based study. J Urol 2009;182:2742-7
  2. Mehl AA, Nogueira Filho DC, Mantovani LM, Grippa MM, Berger R, Krauss D, et al. Management of Fournier’s gangrene: experience of a university hospital of Curitiba. Rev Col Bras Cir 2010;37:435-41
  3. Vick R, Carson CC 3rd. Fournier’s disease. Urol Clin North Am 1999;26:841-9
  4. Smith GL, Bunker CB, Dinneen MD. Fournier’s gangrene. Br J Urol 1998;81:347-55
  5. Basoglu M, Ozbey I, Atamanalp SS, Yildirgan MI, Aydinli B, Polat O, et al. Management of Fournier’s gangrene: review of 45 cases. Surg Today 2007;37:558-63
  6. Martínez-Rodríguez R, Ponce de León J, Caparrós J, Villavicencio H. Fournier’s gangrene: a monographic urology center experience with twenty patients. Urol Int 2009;83:323-8
  7. Atakan IH, Kaplan M, Kaya E, Aktoz T, Inci O. A lifethreatening infection: Fournier’s gangrene. Int Urol Nephrol 2002;34:387-92
  8. Enriquez JM, Moreno S, Devesa M, Morales V, Platas A, Vicente E. Fournier’s syndrome of urogenital and anorectal origin. A retrospective, comparative study. Dis Colon Rectum 1987;30:33-7
  9. Akgün Y, Yilmaz G. Factors affecting mortality in Fournier’s gangrene. Ulus Travma Acil Cerrahi Derg 2005;11:49-57
  10. Ersay A, Yilmaz G, Akgun Y, Celik Y. Factors affecting mortality of Fournier’s gangrene: review of 70 patients. ANZ J Surg 2007;77:43-8
  11. Eke N. Fournier’s gangrene: a review of 1726 cases. Br J Surg 2000;87:718-28
  12. Norton KS, Johnson LW, Perry T, Perry KH, Sehon JK, Zibari GB. Management of Fournier’s gangrene: an eleven year retrospective analysis of early recognition, diagnosis, and treatment. Am Surg 2002;68:709-13
  13. Chawla SN, Gallop C, Mydlo JH. Fournier’s gangrene: an analysis of repeated surgical debridement. Eur Urol 2003;43:572-5
  14. Laor E, Palmer LS, Tolia BM, Reid RE, Winter HI. Outcome prediction in patients with Fournier’s gangrene. J Urol 1995;154:89-92
  15. Czymek R, Frank P, Limmer S, Schmidt A, Jungbluth T, Roblick U, et al. Fournier’s gangrene: is the female gender a risk factor? Langenbecks Arch Surg 2010;395:173-80
  16. Simsek Celik A, Erdem H, Guzey D, Celebi F, Birol S, Erozgen F, et al. Fournier’s gangrene: series of twenty patients. Eur Surg Res 2011;46:82-6
  17. Tuncel A, Aydin O, Tekdogan U, Nalcacioglu V, Capar Y, Atan A. Fournier’s gangrene: Three years of experience with 20 patients and validity of the Fournier’s Gangrene