Dergiler / Turkish Journal of Urology / 2016 / Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 3

Overview of different scoring systems in Fournier’s Gangrene and assessment of prognostic factors

Sayfa
190–196
DOI
—
🏛️Bu makalenin bibliyografik verileri ve tam metin bağlantısı DergiPark üzerinden sağlanmıştır.
DergiPark Kaydı ↗
✨

Yapay Zeka Hızlı Bakış & Çıkarımlar

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(1 Cümlede Hızlı Çıkarım)

High CCI and FGSI scores could be associated with a poor prognosis in patients with FG

📌 3 Maddede Bu Makale

🎯
Amaç & Hipotez:Objective: In this study we aimed to evaluate prognostic factors for the survival of patients with Fournier’s gangrene (FG), and overview different validated scoring systems for outcome prediction.Material and methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 39 patients treated for FG in our clinic.
📊
Temel Bulgular & Veri:Results: Of 39 patients analyzed, 8 (20.5%) died and 31 (79.5%) survived.
💡
Sonuç & Katkı:High CCI and FGSI scores could be associated with a poor prognosis in patients with FG
🔬Tür:Araştırma Makalesi
📍Kapsam:Genişletilmiş Akademik Örneklem
⚙️Değişkenler:Alan Parametreleri

Özet

Objective: In this study we aimed to evaluate prognostic factors for the survival of patients with Fournier’s gangrene (FG), and overview different validated scoring systems for outcome prediction.Material and methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of 39 patients treated for FG in our clinic. Data were collected on medical history, symptoms, physical examination findings, vital signs, laboratory parameters at admission and at the end of treatment, timing and extent of surgical debridement, and the antibiotic treatment used. The Fournier’s Gangrene Severity Index (FGSI) and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) were used to predict outcome. The data were analyzed in relation with the survival of the patients. Mann-Whitney U test, chi -square test, Wilcoxon signed rank test, and Cox regression analysis were used for the statistical analysis. Results: Of 39 patients analyzed, 8 (20.5%) died and 31 (79.5%) survived. The median FGSI score on admission was 2 for the survivors and 6 for the non-survivors (p=0.004). The median CCI scores of the survivors and non-survivors were 2 and 6.5 , respectively (p=0.001). Except for urea, albumin and hematocrit levels, no significant differences were found between survivors and non-survivors for other laboratory parameters on admission. Lower albumin levels and advanced age were found to be associated with mortality.Conclusion: High blood urea, low albumin, and low hematocrit levels were associated with poor prognosis. High CCI and FGSI scores could be associated with a poor prognosis in patients with FG

🔖

Bu Makaleye Atıf Yap

DOLUOĞLU, Ö. G., KARAGÖZ, M. A., KILINÇ, M. F., KARAKAN, T., YÜCETÜRK, C. N., SARICI, H., ÖZGÜR, B. C., EROĞLU, M. (2016). Overview of different scoring systems in Fournier’s Gangrene and assessment of prognostic factors. Turkish Journal of Urology, Cilt: 42 - Sayı: 3, 190–196. https://ajindex.com/articles/379875

📄 Tam Metin PDF Okuyucu

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

Kaynakça (1)

  1. Fournier JA. Gangrene foudroyante de la verge. Semin Med 1883;3:345-8. 2. Laor E, Palmer LS, Tolia BM, Reid RE, Winter HI. Outcome prediction in patients with Fournier’s gangrene. J Urol 1995;154:89- 92. [CrossRef] 3. Spirnak JP, Resnick MI, Hampel N, Persky L. Fournier’s gangrene: report of 20 patients. J Urol 1984;131:289-92. 4. Clayton MD, Fowler JE Jr, Sharifi R, Pearl RK. Causes, presentation and survival of fifty-seven patients with necrotizing fasciitis of the male genitalia. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1990;170:49-53. 5. Flanigan RC, Kursch ED, McDougal WS. Synergistic gangrene of the scrotum and penis secondary to colorectal disease. J Urol 1978;119:369-73. 6. Eke N. Fournier’s gangrene: a review of 1726 cases. Br J Surg 2000;87:718-28. [CrossRef] 7. Corcoran AT, Smaldone MC, Gibbons EP, Walsh TJ, Davies BJ. Validation of the Fournier’s gangrene severity index in a large contemporary series. J Urol 2008;180:944-8. [CrossRef] 8. Erol B, Tuncel A, Hanci V, Tokgoz H, Yildiz A, Akduman B, et al. Fournier’s gangrene: Overview of prognostic factors and definition of new prognostic parameter. Urology 2010;75:1193-8. [CrossRef] 9. Lin E, Yang S, Chiu AW, Chow YC, Chen M, Lin WC, et al. Is Fournier’s gangrene severity index useful for predicting outcome of Fournier’s gangrene? Urol Int 2005;75:119-22. 10. Yeniyol CO, Suelozgen T, Arslan M, Ayder AR. Fournier’s gangrene: experience with 25 patients and use of Fournier’s gangrene severity index score. Urology 2004;64:218-22. [CrossRef] 11. 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 severity index score. Eur Urol 2006;50:838-43. [CrossRef] 12. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis 1987;40:373-83. [CrossRef] 13. Jones RB, Hirschmann JV, Brown GS, Tremann JA. Fournier’s syndrome: necrotizing subcutaneous infection of the male genitalia. J Urol 1979;122:279-82. 14. Tuncel A, Aydin O, Tekdogan U, Nalcacioglu V, Capar Y, Atan A. Comparison of different scoring systems for outcome prediction in patients with Fournier’s gangrene: experience with 50 patients. Scand J Urol 2014;48:393-9. [CrossRef] 15. Enriquez JM, Moreno S, Devesa M, Morales V, Platas A, Vicente E. Fournier’s syndrome of urogenital and anorectal origin: a retrospective, comperative study. Dis Colon Rectum 1987;30: