Comparison of LRINEC Scoring System with Finger Test and Histopathological Examination for Necrotizing Fasciitis.

IF 0.8 Q4 SURGERY
Farah Naaz Kazi, J V Sharma, Shaurav Ghosh, D Prashanth, V Om Pramod Kumar Raja
{"title":"Comparison of LRINEC Scoring System with Finger Test and Histopathological Examination for Necrotizing Fasciitis.","authors":"Farah Naaz Kazi,&nbsp;J V Sharma,&nbsp;Shaurav Ghosh,&nbsp;D Prashanth,&nbsp;V Om Pramod Kumar Raja","doi":"10.1055/s-0041-1740629","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>  Necrotizing fasciitis (NF) is a life-threatening condition requiring urgent attention. It is clinically difficult to diagnose, linked to severe systemic toxicity, and has poor prognosis. In 2001, Andreasen and coworkers described the \"Finger test\" for the diagnosis of NF. Subsequent studies have suggested early recognition and management of NF. In this study, we compare the LRINEC-Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis-scoring system with the \"Finger test\" and histopathological examination for diagnosis of NF. <b>Results</b>  In our study, LRINEC scoring system and Finger test are statistically significant in the diagnosis of NF. Males are more frequently affected, and the most common organism causing NF is <i>Staphylococcus</i> . Histopathology remained the gold standard for diagnosis of NF, while LRINEC score and Finger test were good diagnostic tools for early diagnosis, with sensitivities of 83.33 and 86.11%, respectively. <b>Conclusion</b>  LRINEC laboratory-based scoring system is easy and reliable diagnostic tool though histopathology remains the gold standard. There is statistically significant correlation between histopathology and laboratory criteria. LRINEC test is independently better than bedside Finger test alone or combined LRINEC and bedside Finger test.</p>","PeriodicalId":44614,"journal":{"name":"Surgery Journal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8763456/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgery Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0041-1740629","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SURGERY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background  Necrotizing fasciitis (NF) is a life-threatening condition requiring urgent attention. It is clinically difficult to diagnose, linked to severe systemic toxicity, and has poor prognosis. In 2001, Andreasen and coworkers described the "Finger test" for the diagnosis of NF. Subsequent studies have suggested early recognition and management of NF. In this study, we compare the LRINEC-Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis-scoring system with the "Finger test" and histopathological examination for diagnosis of NF. Results  In our study, LRINEC scoring system and Finger test are statistically significant in the diagnosis of NF. Males are more frequently affected, and the most common organism causing NF is Staphylococcus . Histopathology remained the gold standard for diagnosis of NF, while LRINEC score and Finger test were good diagnostic tools for early diagnosis, with sensitivities of 83.33 and 86.11%, respectively. Conclusion  LRINEC laboratory-based scoring system is easy and reliable diagnostic tool though histopathology remains the gold standard. There is statistically significant correlation between histopathology and laboratory criteria. LRINEC test is independently better than bedside Finger test alone or combined LRINEC and bedside Finger test.

LRINEC评分系统与指检及组织病理学检查对坏死性筋膜炎的比较。
背景:坏死性筋膜炎(NF)是一种危及生命的疾病,需要紧急关注。临床上难以诊断,与严重的全身毒性有关,预后差。2001年,Andreasen和同事描述了诊断NF的“手指测试”。随后的研究提示了NF的早期识别和管理。在这项研究中,我们比较了lrinec -实验室风险指标坏死性筋膜炎评分系统与“手指试验”和组织病理学检查诊断NF。结果在本研究中,LRINEC评分系统和Finger检验对NF的诊断具有统计学意义。男性更容易感染,最常见的细菌是葡萄球菌。组织病理学仍然是诊断NF的金标准,LRINEC评分和Finger试验是早期诊断的良好诊断工具,敏感性分别为83.33%和86.11%。结论LRINEC实验室评分系统是简便可靠的诊断工具,但组织病理学仍是金标准。组织病理学和实验室标准有统计学上显著的相关性。LRINEC测试单独优于床边手指测试或LRINEC与床边手指测试联合。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Surgery Journal
Surgery Journal SURGERY-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
64
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信