SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Selçuk Tıp Dergisi / 2019 / Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 1

Evaluation of Deep-Seated Soft Tissue Foreign Bodies According to Gender and Age Groups

Derin Yerleşimli Yumuşak Doku Yabanci Cisimlerinin Cinsiyet ve Yaş Gruplarina Göre Değerlendirilmesi

Recep Memik
Tahsin Sami Colak
Kayhan Kesik
Ismail Hakkı Korucu
Mustafa Ozer
Burkay Kutluhan Kacira
Faik Turkmen
Mehmet Turker
Veysel Basbuğ
Pages
24–30
Publication Date
2022-10-17
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)

FB type and location were analyzed according to the gender and age groups.Results: The most common FB was metal piece in men by 48.4%, and needle in women by 77.3% (P

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: We aimed to determine types and locations of deep-seated soft tissue foreign bodies (FB) and to evaluate the differences between gender and age groups.Patients and Methods: A total of 310 patients operated due to deep-seated FB penetration between January 2011 and January 2018 were included in the study.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Patients were divided into three groups as under 18 years, 18-45 years, and over 45 years.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:FB type and location were analyzed according to the gender and age groups.Results: The most common FB was metal piece in men by 48.4%, and needle in women by 77.3% (P
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2011 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: We aimed to determine types and locations of deep-seated soft tissue foreign bodies (FB) and to evaluate the differences between gender and age groups.Patients and Methods: A total of 310 patients operated due to deep-seated FB penetration between January 2011 and January 2018 were included in the study. Patients were divided into three groups as under 18 years, 18-45 years, and over 45 years. FB were divided into five groups. Locations of the FB were divided into five region in the upper extremities and into six region in the lower extremities. FB type and location were analyzed according to the gender and age groups.Results: The most common FB was metal piece in men by 48.4%, and needle in women by 77.3% (P

Özet

Amaç: Çalışmadaki amacımız, derin yerleşimli yumuşak doku yabancı cisimlerinin tipinin ve yerleşim yerlerinin belirlenerek, cinsiyet ve yaş grupları arasındaki farklılıkların değerlendirilmesidir. Hastalar ve Yöntem: Ocak 2011 ile Ocak 2018 yılları arasında derin yerleşimli yabancı cisim penetrasyonu nedeniyle cerrahi uygulanan 310 hasta çalışmaya dahil edildi. Hastalar 18 yaş altı, 18-45 yaş arası ve 45 yaş üzeri olmak üzere 3 gruba ayrıldı. Yabancı cisimler 5 gruba ayrıldı. Yabancı cisim yerleşim yeri olarak üst ekstremite 5 bölgeye, alt ekstremite ise 6 bölgeye ayrıldı. Yabancı cisim tipi ve yerleşim yeri, yaş gupları ve cinsiyete göre karşılaştırılarak analiz edildi. Bulgular: Erkeklerde en sık karşılaşılan yabancı cisim %48,4 metal parçasıyken, kadınlarda %77,3 iğneydi (P

🔖

Cite This Article

Memik, R., Colak, T. S., Kesik, K., Korucu, I. H., Ozer, M., Kacira, B. K., Turkmen, F., Turker, M., Basbuğ, V. (2022). Evaluation of Deep-Seated Soft Tissue Foreign Bodies According to Gender and Age Groups. Selçuk Tıp Dergisi, Cilt: 35 - Sayı: 1, 24–30. https://ajindex.com/articles/591826

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (17)

  1. Kurtulmus T, Saglam N, Saka G, et al. Tips and tricks in the diagnostic workup and the removal of foreign bodies in extremities. Acta Orthop Traumatol Turc 2013;47(6):387-92
  2. Polat B, Atıcı Y, Gürpınar T, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of retained wooden foreign bodies in the extremities using ultrasound. Acta Ortop Bras 2018;26(3):198-200
  3. Anderson M, Newmeyer WL, Kilgore ES. Diagnosis and treatment of retained foreign bodies in the hand. Am J Surg 1982;144(1):63-7
  4. Salati SA, Rather A. Missed foreign bodies in the hand: An experience from a center in Kashmir. Libyan J Med 2010;12:5
  5. Ceylan MF, Guner S, Ediz L, et al. Removal of metallic foreign bodies embedded in soft tissues by stereotaxic approach. Afr Health Sci 2014;14(1):64-71
  6. Nagendran T. Management of foreign bodies in the emergency department. Hospital Physician 1999:9;27-40
  7. Peterson JJ, Bancroft LW, Kransdorf MJ. Wooden foreign bodies: Imaging appearance. Am J Roentgenol 2002;178:557-62
  8. Ozsarac M, Demircan A, Sener S. Glass foreign body in soft tissue: Possibility of high morbidity due to delayed migration. J Emerg Med 2009;20:30-4
  9. Hunter TB, Taljanovic MS. Foreign bodies. Radiographics 2003;23:731-57
  10. Sidharthan S, Mbako AN. Pitfalls in diagnosis and problems in extraction of retained wooden foreign bodies in the foot. Foot Ankle Surg 2010;16:e18-20
  11. Courter BJ. Radiographic screening for glass foreign bodies- what does a “negative” foreign body series really mean? Ann Emerg Med 1990;19:997-1000
  12. Coombs CJ, Mutimer KL, Slattery PG, et al. Hide and seek: Pre-operative ultrasonic localization of non radioopaque foreign bodies. Aust N Z J Surg 1990;60:989-91
  13. Shiels WE, Babcock DS, Wilson JL, et al. Localization and guided removal of soft-tissue foreign bodies with sonography. AJR Am J Roenigetiol 1990;155:1277-81
  14. Monu JU, McManus CM, Ward WG, et al. Soft-tissue masses caused by long-standing foreign bodies in the extremities: MR imaging findings. Am J Roentgenol 1995;165:395-7
  15. Ginsberg LE, Williams DW, Mathews VP. CT in penetrating craniocervical injury by wooden foreign bodies: Reminder of a pitfall. Am J Neuroradiol 1993;14:892-5
  16. Rubin G, Chezar A, Raz R, et al. Nail puncture wound through a rubber-soled shoe: A retrospective study of 96 adult patients. J Foot Ankle Surg 2010;49:421-5
  17. Vargas B, Wildhaber B, La Scala G. Late migration of a foreign body in the foot 5 years after initial trauma. Pediatr Emerg Care 2011;27:535-6. 18