ArticleWorld journal of urology2023
Comparison of different scoring systems for predicting in-hospital mortality for patients with Fournier gangrene.
Article in World journal of urology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
10 citing papers in PubMed, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Beyond Traditional Prognostic Scores: Associations of Organ Dysfunction and Metastatic Malignancy with Mortality in Fournier's Gangrene.Diseases (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Prediction of intensive care unit requirement and in-hospital mortality in Fournier's gangrene: a comparative analysis of conventional statistical and machine learning models.Updates in surgery · 2026Article
- Fournier's gangrene in a woman with chronic neutropenia presenting at 12 weeks of pregnancy: a case report and literature review.Case reports in women's health · 2025Article
- Time to diagnose and time to surgery in patients presenting with necrotizing fasciitis: a retrospective analysis.European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society · 2025Article
- Prognostic factors and clinical outcomes in Fournier's Gangrene: a retrospective study of 35 patients.BMC infectious diseases · 2024Article
- Fournier's Gangrene: clinical case review and analysis of risk factors for mortality.BMC surgery · 2024Article
- Fournier's Gangrene Surgical Reconstruction: A Systematic Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2024Review
- Article
- A case of successful treatment of Fournier's gangrene through conservative management and elective debridement.IJU case reports · 2024Article
- Atlas of patient-reported outcome measures, nomograms and scoring systems used in simple and complicated urinary tract infections: a systematic review.Therapeutic advances in infectious diseaseReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo compare different scoring systems for predicting in-hospital mortality in patients with Fournier gangrene (FG).
methodsA comprehensive literature search was performed to find all scoring systems that have been proposed previously as a predictor for in-hospital mortality in patients with FG. Data of all patients with FG who were hospitalized in one of Indonesia's largest tertiary referral hospitals between 2012 and 2022 were used. The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis was performed to evaluate the diagnostic performance of the scoring systems.
resultsTen scoring systems were found, i.e., Fournier's Gangrene Severity Index (FGSI), Uludag FGSI, simplified FGSI, NUMUNE Fournier score (NFS), Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis, age-adjusted Charlson comorbidity index, sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA), quick SOFA, acute physiology and chronic health evaluation II, and surgery APGAR score (SAS). Of 164 FG patients included in the analyses, 26.4% died during hospitalization. All scoring systems except SAS could predict in-hospital mortality of patients with FG. Three scoring systems had areas under the ROC curve (AUROC) higher than 0.8, i.e., FGSI (AUROC 0.905, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.860-0.950), SOFA (AUROC 0.830, 95% CI 0.815-0.921), and NFS (AUROC 0.823, 95% CI 0.739-0.906). Both FGSI and SOFA had sensitivity and NPV of 1.0, whereas NFS had a sensitivity of 0.74 and an NPV of 0.91.
conclusionThis study shows that FGSI and SOFA are the most reliable scoring systems to predict in-hospital mortality in FG, as indicated by the high AUROC and perfect sensitivity and NPV.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.