Prognostic determinants in severe odontogenic space infections: a single-center retrospective analysis.

IF 1.1 Q3 DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE Minerva dental and oral science Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.23736/S2724-6329.22.04556-9
Nagarajan K Aditya, Subha Lakshmi, Shiva Bharani
{"title":"Prognostic determinants in severe odontogenic space infections: a single-center retrospective analysis.","authors":"Nagarajan K Aditya,&nbsp;Subha Lakshmi,&nbsp;Shiva Bharani","doi":"10.23736/S2724-6329.22.04556-9","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Odontogenic space infections are a common presentation in oral and maxillofacial surgery units worldwide. Multiple patient and treatment dependent variables may be used predict the outcomes of the disease process. This study was aimed at a retrospective evaluation of significant predictors of prognosis in terms of length of hospital stay and the need for re-exploration in cases of odontogenic space infections.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Patients who underwent incision and drainage of odontogenic space infections were identified from the hospital records of the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dental Sciences, Davangere, Karnataka, India. The variables assessed included Diabetic status, pyrexia on admission, topical rubefacient agent application, hot fomentation, recent tooth extraction, trismus, dysphagia or dyspnea on presentation, white blood cell count, number of spaces involved, antibiotics used, organisms isolated, severity of the infection and the anesthesia technique used (local anesthesia [LA], conscious sedation or general anesthesia).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The sample consisted of 259 patients (110 male, 159 female) with a mean age of 41±16.9 years. Space infections were preceded by tooth extractions in 53 (20%) cases, rubefacient balm application in 130 (40%) and hot fomentation in 58 (22%) cases. Trismus was noted in 140 patients with an average mouth opening of 21±10.3 mm. Dyspnea and dysphagia were noted in 55 (21%) and 96 (37%) patients each. Sixty-six patients were diabetic. The average length of hospital stay was 5.8±3 days and re-exploration was required in 75 (29%) patients. Significant predictors of hospital stay were severity (P<0.001), number of spaces affected (P<0.001), hot fomentation (P=0.04), trismus (P<0.001), dysphagia (P<0.001) and dyspnea (P<0.001). Predictors of re-exploration are an increased primary surgery under LA (P<0.001), white blood cell count (P<0.001), rubefacient balm application (P=0.045), dysphagia (P<0.001), dyspnea (P=0.018), and reduced mouth opening (P<0.001). No significant correlation between diabetes and length of hospital stay or the need for re-exploration were found in this study.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Poorer outcomes can be predicted based on the severity of the infection, the number of spaces involved, an increased white blood cell count as well as clinical signs and symptoms like trismus, dysphagia and dyspnea. Hot fomentation and Rubefacient agent application were identified as significant determinants of poor prognosis in this study. The presence of these indicators warrants a more aggressive approach towards management of space infections.</p>","PeriodicalId":18709,"journal":{"name":"Minerva dental and oral science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Minerva dental and oral science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.23736/S2724-6329.22.04556-9","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Odontogenic space infections are a common presentation in oral and maxillofacial surgery units worldwide. Multiple patient and treatment dependent variables may be used predict the outcomes of the disease process. This study was aimed at a retrospective evaluation of significant predictors of prognosis in terms of length of hospital stay and the need for re-exploration in cases of odontogenic space infections.

Methods: Patients who underwent incision and drainage of odontogenic space infections were identified from the hospital records of the Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, College of Dental Sciences, Davangere, Karnataka, India. The variables assessed included Diabetic status, pyrexia on admission, topical rubefacient agent application, hot fomentation, recent tooth extraction, trismus, dysphagia or dyspnea on presentation, white blood cell count, number of spaces involved, antibiotics used, organisms isolated, severity of the infection and the anesthesia technique used (local anesthesia [LA], conscious sedation or general anesthesia).

Results: The sample consisted of 259 patients (110 male, 159 female) with a mean age of 41±16.9 years. Space infections were preceded by tooth extractions in 53 (20%) cases, rubefacient balm application in 130 (40%) and hot fomentation in 58 (22%) cases. Trismus was noted in 140 patients with an average mouth opening of 21±10.3 mm. Dyspnea and dysphagia were noted in 55 (21%) and 96 (37%) patients each. Sixty-six patients were diabetic. The average length of hospital stay was 5.8±3 days and re-exploration was required in 75 (29%) patients. Significant predictors of hospital stay were severity (P<0.001), number of spaces affected (P<0.001), hot fomentation (P=0.04), trismus (P<0.001), dysphagia (P<0.001) and dyspnea (P<0.001). Predictors of re-exploration are an increased primary surgery under LA (P<0.001), white blood cell count (P<0.001), rubefacient balm application (P=0.045), dysphagia (P<0.001), dyspnea (P=0.018), and reduced mouth opening (P<0.001). No significant correlation between diabetes and length of hospital stay or the need for re-exploration were found in this study.

Conclusions: Poorer outcomes can be predicted based on the severity of the infection, the number of spaces involved, an increased white blood cell count as well as clinical signs and symptoms like trismus, dysphagia and dyspnea. Hot fomentation and Rubefacient agent application were identified as significant determinants of poor prognosis in this study. The presence of these indicators warrants a more aggressive approach towards management of space infections.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
严重牙源性间隙感染的预后决定因素:单中心回顾性分析。
背景:牙源性间隙感染是世界范围内口腔颌面外科的常见表现。多个患者和治疗相关变量可用于预测疾病过程的结果。本研究旨在回顾性评估牙源性间隙感染患者住院时间长短和再次检查的必要性等重要预后预测因素。方法:从印度卡纳塔克邦达文杰尔口腔科学学院口腔颌面外科病历中选择行切口引流治疗牙源性间隙感染的患者。评估的变量包括糖尿病状态、入院时的发热、局部红肿剂的应用、热发酵、最近拔牙、牙关紧闭、出现时的吞咽困难或呼吸困难、白细胞计数、涉及的间隙数量、使用的抗生素、分离的微生物、感染的严重程度和使用的麻醉技术(局部麻醉[LA]、有意识镇静或全身麻醉)。结果:259例患者(男110例,女159例),平均年龄41±16.9岁。间隙感染前拔牙53例(20%),涂抹润肤膏130例(40%),热发酵58例(22%)。140例患者出现牙关紧闭,平均开口21±10.3 mm。呼吸困难和吞咽困难患者分别为55例(21%)和96例(37%)。66例患者为糖尿病患者。平均住院时间为5.8±3天,75例(29%)患者需要再次探查。结论:根据感染的严重程度、受累的间隙数、白细胞计数的增加以及咬牙、吞咽困难和呼吸困难等临床体征和症状,可以预测较差的预后。在本研究中,热发酵和Rubefacient剂的应用被确定为不良预后的重要决定因素。有了这些指标,就有理由采取更积极的办法来管理空间感染。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Minerva dental and oral science
Minerva dental and oral science DENTISTRY, ORAL SURGERY & MEDICINE-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
5.00%
发文量
61
期刊最新文献
In-silico immunoinformatic vaccine design for Treponema denticola ergothionase. Virtual reality in specialized dentistry: employing virtual reality for the alleviation of pain and anxiety in hereditary angioedema patients. Medico-legal considerations in immediate loading implantology: risks, responsibilities, and best practices. Restorative and endodontic clinical strategies during COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic: a revision of the literature. A simple method to identify implant sites in totally edentulous arches: a pilot study with thermo-printed templates used with cone beam computed tomography.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1