Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg ; 59(4): 433-438, 2021 05.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33715891

RESUMO

Cervicofacial infection (CFI) is a common presentation to the Oral and Maxillofacial (OMFS) department and accounts for significant emergency activity. The current study aims to understand the aetiology, management, and clinical features of patients hospitalised with CFI. Our study included all patients admitted for management of CFI from May to October 2017 at 25 OMFS units across 17 UK regions. Data were collected prospectively and included age, comorbidities, prior treatment received, markers of sepsis, and presenting clinical features. One thousand and two (1002) admissions were recorded; 546 (54.5%) were male. Median (range) age was 34 (1-94) years. The most common presenting complaints were trismus (46%) and dysphagia (27%). Airway compromise was present in 1.7% of cases. Odontogenic infection accounted for 822/1002 (82%) admissions. Of those with an infection of odontogenic origin, 453/822 (55.1%) had received previous treatment. Two-thirds of those who had received treatment were managed by antibiotics alone (300/453, 66.2%). Patients met criteria for sepsis in 437/1002 (43.6%) of CFI, and in 374/822 (45.5%) of odontogenic infections. This is the largest study worldwide of patients requiring inpatient management for CFI. Infection due to odontogenic origin is the most frequent reason for admission and nearly half do not seek treatment before presentation. Patients with CFI often present late in their disease and frequently meet criteria for sepsis, requiring timely and aggressive treatment to ensure optimum outcomes. Trismus is an emerging dominant feature with all the implications related to the anaesthetic management of these patients. Knowledge of these factors has implications for the referrer, triage, the emergency department, the anaesthetic team, and members of the OMFS team.


Assuntos
Serviço Hospitalar de Emergência , Sepse , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Hospitalização , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Sepse/epidemiologia , Triagem
2.
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg ; 57(3): 196-206, 2019 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30770139

RESUMO

The role of corticosteroids in the management of cervicofacial infections continues to cause controversy. Systemic anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory effects that reduce swelling and improve symptoms in the head and neck may make these agents an effective addition to the antibiotics used and to surgical management, although this same effect may dull the physiological response to infection, and allow infections to progress. We have systematically reviewed the evidence for the use of corticosteroids in common cervicofacial infections following the PRISMA guidelines. MeSH terms included "head", "neck", "infection", and "glucocorticoid". In total, 31 papers were identified. Eight reported the use of corticosteroids for peritonsillar abscess (PTA), 10 for pharyngitis, four for deep neck space infection (DNSI), four for periorbital cellulitis, and five for supraglottitis. Whilst there is an established evidence base for their use in the treatment of PTA and pharyngitis, other indications need further study, and we highlight the potential pitfalls. The evidence suggests that the use of adjunctive, short-term, high-dose corticosteroids in cervicofacial infections may be safe and effective.


Assuntos
Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Infecções/tratamento farmacológico , Abscesso Peritonsilar , Faringite , Antibacterianos , Cabeça , Humanos , Pescoço
3.
Br J Oral Maxillofac Surg ; 55(9): 940-945, 2017 Nov.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29033149

RESUMO

Cervicofacial infections are common emergency presentations to maxillofacial departments in the UK, there is no consensus about their management and, in particular, the role of corticosteroids is not clear. Our aim was to find out the current practice of UK maxillofacial surgeons in managing these infections using a multicentre questionnaire study. The questionnaire was designed, piloted, and revised before distribution, and questions were asked to assess preoperative, operative, and postoperative management. It was distributed to maxillofacial surgeons throughout the UK through the Maxillofacial Research Trainee Collaborative (MTReC) network, and at the 2016 British Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons (BAOMS) Junior Trainees Group conference. A total of 350 questionnaires were distributed to 17 maxillofacial units. Eighty-six questionnaires were distributed at the BAOMS Junior Trainee conference. An overall response rate of 92% (n=324) was achieved. The results showed that there were important differences in reported practice between and within maxillofacial units in the UK in managing these infections. The antibiotic regimens and use of steroids varied widely. Twenty-three per cent of respondents had to wait over 24hours for access to emergency theatres. However, these results provide no hard evidence for or against the use of corticosteroids in cervicofacial infections.


Assuntos
Infecção Focal Dentária/terapia , Padrões de Prática Médica/estatística & dados numéricos , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Humanos , Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Bucais , Sociedades Médicas , Inquéritos e Questionários , Reino Unido
4.
Br Dent J ; 221(11): 685, 2016 12 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27932838
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...