4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Prospective Validation of the Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis (LRINEC) Score for Necrotizing Fasciitis of the Extremities

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Objectives

          The Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis score was developed as a clinical decision tool for distinguishing necrotizing fasciitis from other soft tissue infections. We prospectively evaluated the performance of the Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis score for the diagnosis of patients with necrotizing fasciitis in the extremities.

          Methods

          We conducted a prospective and observational cohort study of emergency department patients with necrotizing fasciitis or severe cellulitis in the extremities between April 2015 and December 2016. The Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis score was calculated for every enrolled patient. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of cut-off scores of 6 and 8 were evaluated. The accuracy of the Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis score was expressed as the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve.

          Results

          A total of 106 patients with necrotizing fasciitis and 825 patients with cellulitis were included. With an Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis cut-off score ≥6, the sensitivity was 43% (95% confidence interval 34% to 53%), specificity was 83% (95% confidence interval 80% to 86%), positive predictive value was 25% (95% confidence interval 20% to 30%), and negative predictive value was 92% (95% confidence interval 91% to 93%); with an Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis cut-off score ≥8, the sensitivity was 27% (95% confidence interval 19% to 37%), specificity was 93% (95% confidence interval 91% to 94%), positive predictive value was 33% (95% confidence interval 25% to 42%), and negative predictive value was 91% (95% confidence interval 90% to 92%). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve for accuracy of the Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis score was 0.696 (95% CI 0.640 to 0.751).

          Conclusion

          The Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis score may not be an accurate tool for necrotizing fasciitis risk stratification and differentiation between severe cellulitis and necrotizing fasciitis in the emergency department setting based on our study.

          Related collections

          Most cited references26

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Necrotizing fasciitis: clinical presentation, microbiology, and determinants of mortality.

          Necrotizing fasciitis is a life-threatening soft-tissue infection primarily involving the superficial fascia. The present report describes the clinical presentation and microbiological characteristics of this condition as well as the determinants of mortality associated with this uncommon surgical emergency. The medical records of eighty-nine consecutive patients who had been admitted to our institution for necrotizing fasciitis from January 1997 to August 2002 were reviewed retrospectively. The paucity of cutaneous findings early in the course of the disease makes the diagnosis difficult, and only thirteen of the eighty-nine patients had a diagnosis of necrotizing fasciitis at the time of admission. Preadmission treatment with antibiotics modified the initial clinical picture and often masked the severity of the underlying infection. Polymicrobial synergistic infection was the most common cause (forty-eight patients; 53.9%), with streptococci and enterobacteriaceae being the most common isolates. Group-A streptococcus was the most common cause of monomicrobial necrotizing fasciitis. The most common associated comorbidity was diabetes mellitus (sixty-three patients; 70.8%). Advanced age, two or more associated comorbidities, and a delay in surgery of more than twenty-four hours adversely affected the outcome. Multivariate analysis showed that only a delay in surgery of more than twenty-four hours was correlated with increased mortality (p < 0.05; relative risk = 9.4). Early operative débridement was demonstrated to reduce mortality among patients with this condition. A high index of suspicion is important in view of the paucity of specific cutaneous findings early in the course of the disease.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Necrotizing Soft Tissue Infection

            We sought to summarize accuracy of physical examination, imaging, and Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis (LRINEC) score in diagnosis of necrotizing soft tissue infection (NSTI) in adults with a soft tissue infection clinically concerning for NSTI.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Laboratory risk indicator for necrotising fasciitis (LRINEC) score for the assessment of early necrotising fasciitis: a systematic review of the literature.

              Introduction Early operative debridement of necrotising fasciitis is a major outcome determinant. Identification and diagnosis of such patients can be clinically difficult. The Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotising Fasciitis (LRINEC) score first published in 2004 is based on routinely performed parameters and offers a method for identifying early cases. No literature review has yet been performed on the application of such a score. Methods A systematic review of English-language literature was performed from 2004 to 2014 to identify articles reporting use of LRINEC score and the incidence of necrotising fasciitis. We performed a critical review of PubMed, Medline and Embase in line with the PRISMA statement. A meta-analysis was performed with a random effects model and 95% confidence interval. Suitable correlation coefficient and receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves were also calculated. Results After application of inclusion criteria, 16 studies with 846 patients were included. The mean LRINEC score in patients with necrotising fasciitis was 6.06. Two papers reported LRINEC score in patients without necrotising fasciitis with a mean 2.45. All six studies with a reported coefficient of variance were < 1; Pearson correlation coefficient was r = 0.637 (P = 0.011). An ROC curve showed an area under the curve of 0.927. Conclusions The LRINEC score is a useful clinical determinant in the diagnosis and surgical treatment of patients with necrotising fasciitis, with a statistically positive correlation between LRINEC score and a true diagnosis of necrotising fasciitis.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: MethodologyRole: Project administrationRole: Writing – original draftRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Data curationRole: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: Writing – original draft
                Role: ConceptualizationRole: Data curationRole: MethodologyRole: Writing – review & editing
                Role: Formal analysisRole: InvestigationRole: ResourcesRole: SoftwareRole: Writing – original draft
                Role: MethodologyRole: Writing – original draft
                Role: Editor
                Journal
                PLoS One
                PLoS ONE
                plos
                plosone
                PLoS ONE
                Public Library of Science (San Francisco, CA USA )
                1932-6203
                24 January 2020
                2020
                : 15
                : 1
                : e0227748
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Department of Emergency Medicine, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan
                [2 ] School of Medicine, Chang Gung University, Taoyuan, Taiwan
                [3 ] Division of Infectious Diseases, Department of Internal Medical, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Chiayi, Taiwan
                [4 ] Department of Nursing, Chang Gung University of Science and Technology Chiayi Campus, Chiayi, Taiwan
                University of Porto Faculty of Medicine, PORTUGAL
                Author notes

                Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

                Author information
                http://orcid.org/0000-0002-0571-0293
                Article
                PONE-D-19-10946
                10.1371/journal.pone.0227748
                6980593
                31978094
                c1119c00-89be-4054-bdf1-850ee79e87af
                © 2020 Hsiao et al

                This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.

                History
                : 18 April 2019
                : 27 December 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 2, Tables: 4, Pages: 11
                Funding
                Funded by: funder-id http://dx.doi.org/10.13039/100012553, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital;
                Award ID: research program CORPG6E0043
                Award Recipient :
                This study was supported by funding from the Chang Gung Memorial Hospital research program CORPG6E0043.
                Categories
                Research Article
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Infectious Diseases
                Bacterial Diseases
                Cellulitis
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Infectious Diseases
                Soft Tissue Infections
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Surgical and Invasive Medical Procedures
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Diagnostic Medicine
                Diagnostic Radiology
                Magnetic Resonance Imaging
                Research and Analysis Methods
                Imaging Techniques
                Diagnostic Radiology
                Magnetic Resonance Imaging
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Radiology and Imaging
                Diagnostic Radiology
                Magnetic Resonance Imaging
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
                Anatomical Pathology
                Cytopathology
                Medicine and health sciences
                Infectious diseases
                Bacterial diseases
                Group A streptococcal infection
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Critical Care and Emergency Medicine
                Medicine and Health Sciences
                Diagnostic Medicine
                Custom metadata
                Data underlying the study are available withing the paper and its Supporting Information files.

                Uncategorized
                Uncategorized

                Comments

                Comment on this article