↓ Skip to main content

Triple diagnostics for early detection of ambivalent necrotizing fasciitis

Overview of attention for article published in World Journal of Emergency Surgery, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
58 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Triple diagnostics for early detection of ambivalent necrotizing fasciitis
Published in
World Journal of Emergency Surgery, October 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13017-016-0108-z
Pubmed ID
Authors

Falco Hietbrink, Lonneke G. Bode, Louis Riddez, Luke P. H. Leenen, Marijke R. van Dijk

Abstract

Necrotizing fasciitis is an uncommon, rapidly progressive and potential lethal condition. Over the last decade time to surgery decreased and outcome improved, most likely due to increased awareness and more timely referral. Early recognition is key to improve mortality and morbidity. However, early referral frequently makes it a challenge to recognize this heterogeneous disease in its initial stages. Signs and symptoms might be misleading or absent, while the most prominent skin marks might be in discrepancy with the position of the fascial necrosis. Gram staining and especially fresh frozen section histology might be a useful adjunct. Retrospective analysis of 3 year period. Non-transferred patients who presented with suspected necrotizing fasciitis are included. ASA classification was determined. Mortality was documented. In total, 21 patients are included. Most patients suffered from severe comorbidities. In 11 patients, diagnoses was confirmed based on intra-operative macroscopic findings. Histology and/or microbiotic findings resulted in 6/10 remaining patients in a change in treatment strategy. In total, 17 patients proved to suffer necrotizing fasciitis. In the cohort series 2 patients died due to necrotizing fasciitis. In the early phases of necrotizing fasciitis, clinical presentation can be ambivalent. In the present cohort, triple diagnostics consisting of an incisional biopsy with macroscopic, histologic and microbiotic findings was helpful in timely identification of necrotizing fasciitis.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 58 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 58 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 9 16%
Researcher 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Student > Postgraduate 5 9%
Professor 3 5%
Other 9 16%
Unknown 20 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 47%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 9%
Immunology and Microbiology 3 5%
Computer Science 1 2%
Sports and Recreations 1 2%
Other 1 2%
Unknown 20 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 October 2016.
All research outputs
#20,346,264
of 22,893,031 outputs
Outputs from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#473
of 547 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#277,026
of 320,020 outputs
Outputs of similar age from World Journal of Emergency Surgery
#10
of 11 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,893,031 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 547 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.3. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 320,020 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 11 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.