| Title |
Necrotizing fasciitis: case series and review of the literature on clinical and medico-legal diagnostic challenges
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
International Journal of Legal Medicine, April 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s00414-018-1838-0 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paolo Fais, Alessia Viero, Guido Viel, Renzo Giordano, Dario Raniero, Stefano Kusstatscher, Chiara Giraudo, Giovanni Cecchetto, Massimo Montisci |
| Abstract |
Necrotizing fasciitis (NF) is a life-threatening infection of soft tissues spreading along the fasciae to the surrounding musculature, subcutaneous fat and overlying skin areas that can rapidly lead to septic shock and death. Due to the pandemic increase of medical malpractice lawsuits, above all in Western countries, the forensic pathologist is frequently asked to investigate post-mortem cases of NF in order to determine the cause of death and to identify any related negligence and/or medical error. Herein, we review the medical literature dealing with cases of NF in a post-mortem setting, present a case series of seven NF fatalities and discuss the main ante-mortem and post-mortem diagnostic challenges of both clinical and forensic interests. In particular, we address the following issues: (1) origin of soft tissue infections, (2) micro-organisms involved, (3) time of progression of the infection to NF, (4) clinical and histological staging of NF and (5) pros and cons of clinical and laboratory scores, specific forensic issues related to the reconstruction of the ideal medical conduct and the evaluation of the causal value/link of any eventual medical error. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 53 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 53 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Bachelor | 9 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 5 | 9% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 5 | 9% |
| Researcher | 4 | 8% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 4 | 8% |
| Other | 9 | 17% |
| Unknown | 17 | 32% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 51% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 4% |
| Engineering | 2 | 4% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 2% |
| Chemistry | 1 | 2% |
| Other | 1 | 2% |
| Unknown | 19 | 36% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 09 April 2018.
All research outputs
#18,601,965
of 23,041,514 outputs
Outputs from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#1,357
of 2,090 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#255,420
of 328,950 outputs
Outputs of similar age from International Journal of Legal Medicine
#51
of 57 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,041,514 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,090 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.6. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 328,950 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 57 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.