Fever of unknown origin (FUO) on a land on cross-roads between Asia and Europa; a multicentre study from Turkey.

AIMS: The differential diagnosis of Fever of Unknown Origin (FUO) is still a major clinical challenge despite the advances in diagnostic procedures. In this multicentre study, we aimed to reveal FUO aetiology and factors influencing the final diagnosis of FUO in Turkey. METHODS: A total of 214 patients with FUO between the years 2015 and 2019 from 13 tertiary training and research hospitals were retrospectively evaluated. RESULTS: The etiologic distribution of FUO was infections (44.9%), malignancies (15.42%), autoimmune/inflammatory (11.68%) diseases, miscellaneous diseases (8.41%) and undiagnosed cases (19.62%). Brucellosis (10.25%), extrapulmonary tuberculosis (6.54%) and infective endocarditis (6.54%) were the most frequent three infective causes. Solid malignancies (7.1%) and lymphoma (5.6%), adult-onset still's disease (6.07%) and thyroiditis (5.14%) were other frequent diseases. The aetiological spectrum did not differ in elderly people (P < .05). Infections were less frequent in Western (34.62%) compared with Eastern regions of Turkey (60.71%) (P < .001, OR: 0.31, 95% Cl: 0.19 to 0.60). The ratio of undiagnosed aetiology was significantly higher in elderly people (p: 0.046, OR: 2.34, 95% Cl: 1.00 to 5.48) and significantly lower in Western Turkey (P: .004, OR: 3.07, 95% Cl: 1.39 to 6.71). CONCLUSIONS: Brucellosis, extrapulmonary tuberculosis and infective endocarditis remain to be the most frequent infective causes of FUO in Turkey. Solid tumours and lymphomas, AOSD and thyroiditis are the other common diseases. The aetiological spectrum did not differ in elderly people, on the other hand, infections were more common in Eastern Turkey. A considerable amount of aetiology remained undiagnosed despite the state-of-the-art technology in healthcare services.

Evaluation of 170 Followed-up Cases Treated for Hydatid Disease: A Multicentre Study.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the clinical characteristics of patients with cystic echinococcosis and the diagnostic and therapeutic approaches used. METHODS: This is a multicentre, retrospective study. Patients from six centres who were diagnosed with hydatid cysts in the last five years were evaluated. RESULTS: The mean age was 45.4±17.4 years, and 54.7% were female. The most common complaints were abdominal pain, nausea and vomiting, and the most common physical examination finding was abdominal tenderness. Most patients were diagnosed within 2-6 months. Anaemia and eosinophilia were the most common laboratory findings. The liver was the most commonly involved organ (n=153, 90%). One hundred twenty-five (73.5%) patients underwent ultrasonography. The largest cyst was present in the liver at stage four, and its diameter was 160x170 mm. The rates of the negative, grey zone and positive results were 9.4%, 8.8% and 81.8%. Surgery was more common (n=72, 42.4%) than puncture, aspiration, injection, and re-aspiration treatments (n=14, 8.2%). Of the 47 patients who had a recurrence, 22 (46.8%) had a history of hydatid cyst treatment. CONCLUSION: Hydatid disease, which is endemic in our country, is diagnosed at a late stage. In terms of disease diagnosis, serological tests may be misleading. It was not possible to compare the success rates according to the treatment choices because of the lack of randomisation of stages and sizes of the lesions.