Physiology, not modern operative approach, predicts mortality in extremity necrotizing soft tissue infections at a high-volume center

Anatomic and Treatment Descriptive Features of Foot Infections Presenting With Radiographic Soft Tissue Emphysema

Foot infections associated with soft tissue emphysema, or the radiographic appearance of gas, are widely considered to necessitate urgent decompression with excisional debridement of the necrotic and infectious tissue burden. The objective of this investigation was to describe anatomic features and clinical outcomes associated with the presence of soft tissue emphysema in foot infections. A retrospective chart review was performed of 62 subjects meeting selection criteria. These were primarily male (74.2%), with a history of diabetes mellitus (85.5%), and without a history of previous lower extremity revascularization (98.4%). The primary radiographic location of the soft tissue emphysema was most frequently in the forefoot (61.3%), followed by the midfoot (21.0%), and rearfoot (16.1%). The soft tissue emphysema was most frequently observed primarily in the dorsal foot tissue (49.2%), followed by both dorsal and plantar foot tissue (27.4%), and the plantar foot tissue (24.2%). The soft tissue emphysema was confined to the primary anatomic location in 74.2% of subjects, while 25.8% of cases demonstrated extension into a more proximal anatomic area. Eighty-two percent of subjects underwent a bedside incision and drainage procedure on presentation in the emergency department, and 95.2% underwent a formal incision and drainage procedure in the operating room at 1.05 ± 0.79 (0-5) postadmission days. Twenty-seven percent of subjects had an unplanned 30-day readmission and 17.7% underwent an unplanned reoperation within 30 days following the index discharge. Fifty-two percent of subjects underwent a minor or major amputation during the index admission, while 33.9% eventually resulted in major limb amputation within 12 months. We hope that this investigation adds to the body of knowledge and provides expectations with respect to the evaluation and treatment of foot soft tissue infections complicated by the presence of radiographic soft tissue emphysema.

Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infections in the Vasculopathic Patient: Review of Literature

Background:

Necrotizing soft tissue infection is a surgical emergency associated with high mortality. Its presence in patients with risk factors for peripheral arterial disease such as diabetes mellitus is consistently associated with significantly poorer outcomes. Though it has been over a century since it was initially described in the literature, mortality rates remain high and treatment regimens are not standardized.

Materials and methods:

PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched for articles pertaining to necrotizing soft tissue infections. Articles were screened for relevance with the intent to compare outcomes in prospective studies of patients with diabetes mellitus or peripheral arterial disease. Patient demographics, clinical findings, mortality, rates of amputation, and morbidity were intended to be compared.

Results:

857 articles were identified, 165 duplicates were removed, and 6 prospective trials were identified for inclusion. Due to significant paucity of data, patient heterogeneity, and lack of standardization for surgical management, a descriptive review of the literature in relation to necrotizing soft tissue infections was pursued, with a focus on high-risk patients with peripheral arterial disease or diabetes mellitus.

Conclusions:

Early aggressive surgical intervention or major amputation may reduce mortality at the cost of increased disability and poorer quality of life in the long term, and may be appropriate in vasculopaths with poorly controlled diabetes and rapidly progressive fulminant infection. However, there is a deficiency in high-level evidence supporting surgical decision-making in this setting, with no standardized protocols for amputation. Future research will be needed to clarify the patient population who would benefit from radical amputation versus intention for limb salvage.