Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 481

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 24 of the 24 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Early diagnosis of necrotizing fasciitis

Goh, T, Goh, L G, Ang, C H, Wong, C H·2014·Journal of British Surgery

Abstract

Background: Necrotizing fasciitis is a rapidly progressing skin infection characterized by necrosis of the fascia and subcutaneous tissue, accompanied by severe systemic toxicity. The objective of this systematic review was to identify clinical features and investigations that will aid early diagnosis. Methods: A systematic literature search of PubMed was undertaken using the keywords ‘necrotising fasciitis’, ‘necrotising skin infection’, ‘diagnosis’ and ‘outcome’. Case series of 50 or more subjects with information on symptoms and signs at initial presentation, investigations and clinical outcome were included. Results: Nine case series were selected, with a total of 1463 patients. Diabetes mellitus was a co-morbidity in 44·5 per cent of patients. Contact with marine life or ingestion of seafood in patients with liver disease were risk factors in some parts of Asia. The top three early presenting clinical features were: swelling (80·8 per cent), pain (79·0 per cent) and erythema (70·7 per cent). These being non-specific features, initial misdiagnosis was common and occurred in almost three-quarters of patients. Clinical features that helped early diagnosis were: pain out of proportion to the physical findings; failure to improve despite broad-spectrum antibiotics; presence of bullae in the skin; and gas in the soft tissue on plain X-ray (although this occurred in only 24·8 per cent of patients). Conclusion: A high index of suspicion of necrotizing fasciitis is needed in a patient presenting with cutaneous infection causing swelling, pain and erythema, with co-morbidity of diabetes or liver disease. The presence of bullae, or gas on plain X-ray can be diagnostic. Early surgical exploration is the best approach in the uncertain case.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/bjs.9371

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 481

Metadata

Authors
Goh, T., Goh, L. G., Ang, C. H., & Wong, C. H.
Venue
Journal of British Surgery
Published
2014-01-01
Volume
101
Issue
1
Pages
e119-e125
ISSN
  • 0007-1323 (ISSN-L)
  • 1365-2168
OpenAlex
W1507840341
Cited by
481
References
24
FWCI
17.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.