Managing bite wounds

Management Strategies for Common Animal Bites in Pediatrics: A Narrative Review on the Latest Progress

Animal bites are a common reason for children to visit primary care and emergency departments. Dog bites are the most prevalent, followed by cat bites at 20-30%. Other animals such as bats, monkeys, snakes, and rats collectively contribute less than 1% of cases. Hospitalization is necessary in only 4% of animal bite incidents. The main aim of this narrative review is to summarize the main protocols currently followed in pediatrics in cases involving the most common bites from different animal species. Analysis of the literature showed that the management of common animal bites in children presents a multifaceted challenge requiring a comprehensive understanding of the epidemiology, clinical presentation, and treatment modalities associated with each specific species. Effective wound management is paramount in reducing the risk of infection and promoting optimal healing outcomes. Additionally, tetanus vaccination status should be assessed and updated as necessary, and prophylactic antibiotics may be indicated in certain cases to prevent secondary infections. Furthermore, the role of rabies prophylaxis cannot be overstated, particularly in regions where rabies is endemic or following bites from high-risk animals. In addition to medical management, psychosocial support for both the child and their caregivers is integral to the overall care continuum. Future studies exploring the efficacy of novel treatment modalities, such as topical antimicrobial agents or advanced wound dressings, may offer new insights into optimizing wound healing and reducing the risk of complications.

Surgical Antimicrobial Prophylaxis in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Plastic Surgery: A RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method Consensus Study

For many years, it was clearly shown that surgical procedures might be associated with surgical site infection (SSI). Many scientific institutions prepared guidelines to use in surgery to reduce abuse and misuse of antibiotics. However, in the general guidelines for surgical antibiotic prophylaxis, plastic surgical procedures are not addressed or are only marginally discussed, and children were almost systematically excluded. The main aim of this Consensus document is to provide clinicians with recommendations on antimicrobial prophylaxis for pediatric patients undergoing plastic surgery. The following scenarios were considered: clean plastic surgery in elective procedures with an exclusive skin and subcutis involvement; clean-contaminated/contaminated plastic surgery in elective procedures with an exclusive skin and subcutis involvement; elective plastic surgery with use of local flaps; elective plastic surgery with the use of grafts; prolonged elective plastic surgery; acute burns; clean contused lacerated wounds without bone exposure; high-risk contused lacerated wounds or with bone exposure; contused lacerated wound involving the oral mucosa; plastic surgery following human bite; plastic surgery following animal bite; plastic surgery with tissue expander insertion. Our Consensus document shows that antimicrobial perioperative prophylaxis in pediatric patients undergoing plastic surgery is recommended in selected cases. While waiting the results of further pediatric studies, the application of uniform and shared protocols in these procedures will improve surgical practice, with a reduction in SSIs and consequent rationalization of resources and costs, as well as limiting the phenomenon of antimicrobial resistance.

Infections of the hand: an overview

Infections of the hand are common entities that are frequently encountered by orthopaedic surgeons and primary care physicians.

A high clinical suspicion and a thorough medical history with information about the social and working history of the patients, correct identification of the type and cause of the infection, and prompt initiation of appropriate treatment by the infectious diseases physicians and orthopaedic surgeons are required.

Late diagnosis and inappropriate treatment may be a significant cause of morbidity for the hand and mortality for the patients. This article reviews the clinical spectrum and microbiology of the most common infections of the hand, and discusses the current concepts for their treatment. The aim is to increase the awareness of the treating physicians of the diagnosis and management of infections in the hand.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2019;4:183-193. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.4.180082

Human bite injuries to the head and neck: current trends and management protocols in England and Wales

INTRODUCTION

Human bite injuries can be challenging in their presentation to the examining physician. In a study by Merchant et al., 18% of patients presenting with a human bite injury had suffered wounds to the head and neck region. Current trends in their initial management at presentation to emergency departments throughout England and Wales will be discussed in this paper.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

A postal survey was sent out to 100 A&E lead clinicians. This was followed up by telephone enquiries to improve the response rate. The collated results of the survey were entered onto a spreadsheet (Microsoft Excel©) for the purpose of statistical review.

RESULTS

A 68% response rate from A&E departments throughout England and Wales demonstrated a lack of consensus in the initial management and subsequent treatment of human bite injuries. Written protocols are in place for human bite injuries in 54.4% of units. In 100% of units, initial management involves irrigation +/- debridement of the wound, though there is a lack of agreement on the surgical management of the wound. 77.9% of units follow 'needle stick protocols' when stratifying risk for blood-borne viruses.

CONCLUSION

Human bites pose a number of unique problems, ranging from cellulitis to the transmission of communicable diseases. The maxillofacial surgeon has the added dilemmas surrounding subsequent repair and reconstruction. Appreciation of the complexity of human bite injuries will ensure optimal care for the patient. We propose a set of guidelines developed 'in-house' to assist in the management of human bite injuries.

Negative pressure wound therapy for serious dog bites of extremities: a prospective randomized trial

OBJECTIVES

The objectives were to investigate the emergency treatment of serious dog bite lacerations on limbs and to identify whether negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) was beneficial in these instances.

METHODS

A total of 580 cases with serious limb lacerations due to dog bites were randomly divided into 2 groups. After thorough debridement, the limb lacerations of group A (n = 329) were left open. The remaining cases (n = 251) were randomly divided into 2 subgroups, group B and group C, which were treated with 125 and 75 mm Hg of continuous negative pressure, respectively. Antibiotics were only used in cases where there were systemic signs of wound infection, and were not given prophylactically. The infection rate, infection time, and healing time were analyzed.

RESULTS

The wound infection rates of groups A, B, and C were 9.1%, 4.1%, and 3.9%, respectively. The infection times of the 3 groups were 26.3 ± 11.6, 159.8 ± 13.4, and 166.4 ± 16.2 hours, respectively. The recovery times of the infection patients in the 3 groups were 19.2 ± 4.6, 13.2 ± 2.1, and 12.7 ± 2.3 days, respectively, and in the noninfection patients, the recovery times were 15.6 ± 2.7, 10.1 ± 2.3, and 10.5 ± 1.9 days, respectively. In groups B (-125 mm Hg) and C (-75 mm Hg), the infection rate, infection time, and healing time showed no significant differences.

CONCLUSION

Patients with serious dog bite laceration on limbs could benefit from NPWT. Compared with the traditional treatment of leaving the wounds open, NPWT reduced the infection rate and shortened recovery time. When NPWT was performed, low negative pressure (-75 mm Hg) had the same positive effects as high pressure (-125 mm Hg). Prophylactic antibiotics administration is not recommended for treating this kind of laceration.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic/care management, level II.

Emergency treatment on facial laceration of dog bite wounds with immediate primary closure: a prospective randomized trial study

BACKGROUND

To investigate the emergency treatment on facial laceration of dog bite wounds and identify whether immediate primary closure is feasible.

METHODS

Six hundred cases with facial laceration attacked by dog were divided into two groups randomly and evenly. After thorough debridement, the facial lacerations of group A were left open, while the lacerations of group B were undertaken immediate primary closure. Antibiotics use was administrated only after wound infected, not prophylactically given. The infection rate, infection time and healing time were analyzed.

RESULTS

The infection rate of group A and B was 8.3% and 6.3% respectively (P>0.05); the infection time was 26.3 ± 11.6h and 24.9 ± 13.8h respectively (P>0.05), the healing time was 9.12 ± 1.30 d and 6.57 ± 0.49 d respectively (P<0.05) in taintless cases, 14.24 ± 2.63 d and 10.65 ± 1.69 d respectively (P<0.05) in infected cases.Compared with group A, there was no evident tendency in increasing infection rate (8.3% in group A and 6.3% in group B respectively) and infection period (26.3 ± 11.6h in group A and 24.9 ± 13.8h in group B respectively) in group B. Meanwhile, in group B, the wound healing time was shorter than group A statistically in both taintless cases (9.12 ± 1.30 d in group A and 6.57 ± 0.49 d in group B respectively) and infected cases (14.24 ± 2.63 d in group A and 10.65 ± 1.69 d in group B respectively).

CONCLUSION

The facial laceration of dog bite wounds should be primary closed immediately after formal and thoroughly debridement. And the primary closure would shorten the healing time of the dog bite wounds without increasing the rate and period of infection. There is no potentiality of increasing infection incidence and infection speed, compared immediate primary closure with the wounds left open. On the contrary, primary closure the wounds can promote its primary healing. Prophylactic antibiotics administration was not recommended. and the important facial organ or tissue injuries should be secondary reconditioned.

Bites and stings: epidemiology and treatment

Rapid and effective treatment of bites is a major variable in the overall outcome of a patient who is a victim of a bite. There are a wide range of animals that bite and sting, and the reactions vary depending on the individual and the animal involved. Although most bites are treated on an outpatient basis, patients who have severe complications related to bites become patients in critical care settings. An overview of potential bite and sting sources, with some general guidelines for what to expect and how to treat the patient, is presented.

Dog and cat bite-associated infections in children

Millions of people throughout the world are bitten by animals each year. About 90 % of the bites are caused by dogs and cats, and infections are the most common complications. As children are the most frequently bitten subjects, pediatricians should provide parents with everything they need to know in order to confront the problem. However, this does not seem to be case and, as the treatment of bite wounds is frequently inappropriate and delayed, the risk of acute infection and sequelae is increased. The main aim of this review is to discuss the epidemiology, microbiology, and clinical characteristics of infections due to dog and cat bites in children, and suggest the best approach to their management. Analysis of the published literature shows that prompt treatment is necessary in order to reduce the risk of infection. The therapeutic measures include wound washing, specific prophylaxis (i.e., tetanus and/or rabies), and antibiotics in the case of immunocompromised patients or deep wounds (particularly if there is evidence of edema or crushing), facial bites, or any wound over a tendon or bone.

[Evaluation of rabies post-exposure prophylaxis in humans injured by dogs and cats in the municipality of Jaboticabal, SP, from 2000 through 2006]

The present study aimed to evaluate rabies post-exposure prophylaxis (PEP) in humans in the municipality of Jaboticabal, São Paulo from 2000 through 2006. A descriptive and retrospective study was conducted by collecting data available in patient records. Vaccination costs were also calculated; 2,493 patients injured by animals received PEP, totaling R$ 179,105.14 and 7,108 doses; 2,184 (71.5%) out of the total reports were caused by dogs and cats clinically healthy at the moment of the attack. These animals remained sound throughout the 10-day observation period. The observation was conducted by the victim or by the owner. Considering animal observation and the epidemiological status of rabies in the municipality, all of these patients could have been dismissed from PEP treatment. Instead, only 464 were dismissed, meaning that 1,720 patients were unnecessarily vaccinated. An estimated 4,590 doses and R$114,420.81 could have been saved. In comparison with rates of other municipalities of the State of São Paulo and with the national mean, the number of PEP in Jaboticabal is very high and it became evident that management evaluated neither the health status of the animal nor the epidemiological status of the area for rabies. Permanent awareness and education of public health professionals with respect to rabies epidemiology and the need to perform correct observation of the aggressors are recommended. It is essential that medical and veterinary services be integrated to provide better assessment of cases and safer decisions on the institution of PEP.

Animal bite-associated infections: microbiology and treatment

Human and animal bites may lead to serious infection. The organisms involved tend to originate from the oral cavity of the offending biter, as well as the environment where the injury occurred. A variety of aerobic as well as anaerobic organisms have been isolated from bite wounds, with infection ranging from localized cellulitis to systemic dissemination, leading to severe disease ranging from abscess to bone and joint infection, to endocarditis and brain abscess. Immediate wound management, including recognition of the most commonly associated infectious pathogens, and judicious use of empiric antibiotics are crucial in providing the best care after a bite. Here, we discuss the common animal bite associated infections, and provide the most up to date information regarding their management.

Hand infections

Hand infections are very common and must be properly diagnosed and treated to minimize the potentially devastating functional complications. Acute hand infections include felon, paronychia, deep-space infections, septic arthritis, osteomyelitis, and necrotizing fasciitis. Chronic infections are usually caused by atypical mycobacteria and fungi. There are several conditions that mimic acute hand infections, and it is important to recognize them so that the appropriate treatment can be instilled. To prevent all these complications and poor outcome, prompt diagnosis and early institution of appropriate surgical management and antibiotic treatment are crucial.

Antimicrobial resistance and the management of anaerobic infections

Management of anaerobic infections encompasses surgical procedures, antibacterial therapy and adjuncts. At present, metronidazole, penems, beta-lactam/beta-lactamase inhibitor combinations and chloramphenicol have the highest activity against obligate anaerobes. Tigecycline is a promising new agent. Other antibacterials (e.g., nitazoxanide, moxifloxacin, garenoxacin and ramoplanin) and nonantibiotic agents show potential but need further investigation. The patient's characteristics, mixed anaerobic/aerobic infections, infection sites, bacterial resistance patterns, bactericidal activity of agents and their pharmacokinetics, toxicity and influence on the normal flora should be considered. Susceptibility patterns of anaerobes have become less predictable owing to increasing antibacterial resistance. Emergence of highly virulent or multidrug-resistant strains is challenging the current therapy. To counteract these trends, regular resistance surveillance in anaerobes, rational antibiotic use and evaluation of new treatment alternatives are important.

Suppurative tenosynovitis and septic bursitis

Suppurative tenosynovitis and septic bursitis are closed space infections of the musculoskeletal system. Appropriate antibiotics in combination with incision and drainage are generally recommended. Aggressive surgical management is particularly important in tenosynovitis to prevent tendon necrosis. Empiric antibiotic coverage should be directed toward staphylococci and streptococci. Patient characteristics and epidemiologic exposures may provide clues to unusual causative organisms that are occasionally encountered, such as Neisseria gonorrhoeae, Pasteurella multocida, atypical mycobacteria, fungi, and protothecosis.