ArticleEplasty2024
Postsurgical Pyoderma Gangrenosum After Penile Inversion Vaginoplasty: Case With Review of Diagnostic and Management Strategies.
Article in Eplasty, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Postsurgical pyoderma gangrenosum (PSPG) is a highly uncommon and unpredictable wound healing complication. Rapid progression of ulcers at incisions can cause unfettered dehiscence. Most commonly, PSPG involves breast procedures; however, in this work, we detail a case of a patient who developed PSPG 10 days postoperatively after penile inversion vaginoplasty. Methods: The patient in this case underwent a penile inversion vaginoplasty with orchiectomy in the standard fashion. She had no risk factors for PSPG. Following an uncomplicated hospital stay, the patient developed difficulty with pain control and increasing serous drainage on the 10th postoperative day. On readmission, the patient was found to have developed large, mildly purulent ulcers throughout the perineal wound edges. On exam under anesthesia, the neovaginal canal was found to be patent and intact. The dehisced portions of the incisions were left open and redressed with occlusive bismuth-petrolatum dressing. Dermatology was promptly consulted with suspicion for PSPG. The patient was started on an 18-day prednisone taper with cyclosporine, along with doxycycline and ciprofloxacin. Results: After 5 days of immunosuppressive treatment, the ulcers visibly converted to healthy granulation tissue and were no longer actively purulent. Following another washout, the dehisced wound edges were reapproximated. At follow-up, the patient had no evidence of PSPG recurrence and continued dilating on schedule. Our patient recovered from PSPG without further complications and a satisfactory aesthetic result. Conclusions: This unique case highlights the importance of prompt dermatological consultation, immunosuppression, and avoidance of further pathergy in the setting of suspicion for PSPG.
Indexed as
Identifiers
38846503PMC11155385What 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.