who is at risk who is at risk necrotizing soft
play

Who is at Risk Who is at Risk Necrotizing Soft Necrotizing Soft - PDF document

Who is at Risk Who is at Risk Necrotizing Soft Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infections Tissue Infections This can happen to anyone!!!!!!!!! Most cases are seen in the immune compromised: HIV, Etoh, DM,Ca and transplant. Richard Schlanger,


  1. Who is at Risk Who is at Risk Necrotizing Soft Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infections Tissue Infections • This can happen to anyone!!!!!!!!! • Most cases are seen in the immune compromised: HIV, Etoh, DM,Ca and transplant. Richard Schlanger, MD, PhD, FACS, FAWCP Clinical Director of the CWC • Young athletes the newest group The Ohio State University • Incomplete or under treatment of serious infection. What is NSTI What is NSTI History History • 1883 Fournier described penile and scrotal • Infection that spreads along tissue plains gangrene. affecting anatomical structures: skin,fat and muscle. • 1924 Meleney isolated pure hemolytic streptococci in a patient with Fournier’s. • Toxins produced by the bacteria thrombose even large vessels ahead of the infection. • Cullen first described post operative bacterial synergistic gangrene following a • CDC reports > 1500 new cases yearly appendectomy in 1925. 1

  2. History History Etiology Etiology • Necrotizing Fasciitis was first described in • Hypoxia to tissue. 1948. • Decrease in cellular metabolism, defense • Clostridia first cultures in deep tissue reduction of membrane. infection, 1952. • Decrease leukocyte function. • Hemolytic staphylococcus aureus linked to • Localized tissue trauma. the “Flesh Eating Bacteria” 1988. • Reduced host defense. • MRSA the bacteria of the millennium. Classification Classification Diagnosis Diagnosis • HIGH INDEX OF SUSPICION !!!!!!!! • Type of microorganism. • Poor condition of patient. • Type of tissue involved. • Absence of the usual signs of tissue • Therapy required. inflammation. • Rate of progression. • Fever and elevated WBC out of proportion • Initial findings at presentation: bullae, pain to wound. and gas. 2

  3. Diagnostic Aids Diagnostic Aids Necrotizing Fasciitis Necrotizing Fasciitis • Incubation 1- 4 days • Gram Stain of deep tissue. • Onset Acute • Plain radiographs looking for gas or sub-Q air. • Toxicity 2+ • CT scan • Pain Moderate to severe • Culture using deep tissue, not swab. • Exudate Perfuse serosang • Operating Room: debridement • Odor None initially • Gas None initially Necrotizing Fasciitis Necrotizing Fasciitis Clinical Presentations Clinical Presentations • Muscle Viable • Necrotizing Fasciitis • Skin Cellulitic • Necrotizing Cellulitis • Mortality > 35 % • Myonecrosis • Bacteria usually aerobic strep and staph with anaerobic symbiosis +/_ bacteroids and rarely clostridia, e-coli. 3

  4. Necrotizing Cellulitis Necrotizing Cellulitis Myonecrosis Myonecrosis • Incubation 1-3days. • Incubation 1-2 days • Onset Semi- acute • Onset Acute • Toxicity 1+ • Toxicity 3+ • Pain Severe • Pain Out of proportion • Functional loss Acute • Exudate “dirty dish water” • Exudate None • Odor “wet rodent”, foul • Odor None • Gas Present Necrotizing Cellulitis Necrotizing Cellulitis Myonecrosis Myonecrosis • Gas Usually present **** • Muscle Involved: “cooked” • Muscle Dead anatomic groups • Skin Cellulitis and gangrene • Skin Intact • Mortality > 75% • Mortality > 35% • Morbidity > 60% high amp rate 4

  5. The Ohio State The Ohio State Treatment Treatment Experience Experience • The Gold Standard for almost forever was: • 225 patients from 1999- 2008 • Surgery: wide and extensive debridement to viable tissue, reoperation anticipated. • Ages 22 – 82 yo • Antibiotics: broad coverage for aerobic and • > 50% DM anaerobic bacteria • 25% documented immunocompromised • MRSA is public enemy #1 and is presumed • 20% misdiagnosed present and treated. • Mortality depended on time of diagnosis and treatment. Treatment 2010 Treatment 2010 Group 1 Group 1 • Patients transferred to OSU after diagnosis • All major medical and surgical texts: and treatment done at another institution. “Some authors suggest that Hyperbaric Oxygen treatment may have some benefit, • Average delay in transfer 3-5 days but it remains controversial.” Or, “It is • Number of surgical debridement >3 cumbersome and may delay life saving surgery.” • All started on broad spectrum antibiotics • All need redebridement upon arrival at OSU • This is not what we do at OSU !!! • Mortality despite HBO > 75% 5

  6. Group 2 Group 2 Why Hyperbarics Why Hyperbarics • Patients transferred for other facilities • HBO is the placement of a patient in a within 24hrs of diagnosis. closed acrylic tube, pressurized > 1ATA with 100% oxygen. • No treatments done before arrival at OSU • It is bacterialcidal except appropriate antibiotics. • It increases WBC activity • Upon arrival: surgical debridement, HBO, 2 nd look surgery and HBO bid until • It neutralizes toxins symptoms and cultures negative. • It causes angiogenisis. • Mortality < 15% Group 3 Group 3 Surgery Surgery • Role #1 create decompression • All cases seen at OSU and diagnosed fasciotomies in < 12hrs. • Role #2 debride only obviously dead tissue • All cases treated by protocol: antibiotics, • Role#3 2 nd and 3 rd looks after HBO day 1 surgery and HBO (critical care as needed) mandatory • Mortality < 5% • Role #4 amputation is procedure of last resort. 6

  7. 7

  8. 8

  9. 9

  10. Conclusion Conclusion • Always suspect the worst case scenario • Treatment is a three headed monster; massive antibiotics, surgery and HBO • If you do not have direct access to HBO , find the nearest center and get your patient there ASAP. • Mortality is care dependant. 10

Recommend


More recommend