MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1177/00034894221088179

Медицинская библиотека · The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology · 2022

Eight Tales of Cervical Necrotizing Fasciitis and Free Tissue Transfer.

Rapoport Nicholas A, Lee David S, Lee Jake J, Puram Sidharth V, Jackson Ryan S, Pipkorn Patrik

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

OBJECTIVES

Aggressive surgical debridement is required in cervical necrotizing fasciitis, and in severe defects, subsequent free tissue transfer might be necessary. However, there is concern that the inflammatory environment of the infection site may threaten free flap viability, particularly with concerns for thrombosis of feeding vessels and compromised tissue integration. Cases in the head and neck area are rare, so there are limited data regarding outcomes of free tissue transfer in these patients.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review assessed patients with cervical necrotizing fasciitis treated at an academic tertiary hospital between 2015 and 2021. Twenty-five patients were identified, and eight required free tissue transfer after adequate surgical debridement. Treatment, hospital course, and demographic data were collected on these eight patients.

RESULTS

All flaps had full survival at follow up (median follow up 3 months, range 1-39 months) without concerns for vascular compromise.

CONCLUSION

These data suggest that in patients with large soft tissue defects due to cervical necrotizing fasciitis, free tissue transfer may be a safe treatment modality.

Для цитирования: Rapoport Nicholas A, Lee David S, Lee Jake J, Puram Sidharth V, Jackson Ryan S, Pipkorn Patrik. Eight Tales of Cervical Necrotizing Fasciitis and Free Tissue Transfer.. The Annals of otology, rhinology, and laryngology. 2022. DOI: 10.1177/00034894221088179.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.