ArticleEuropean journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society2024
Characterization and treatment protocol of injuries inflicted to humans by synurbic European wild boars (Sus scrofa).
Article in European journal of trauma and emergency surgery : official publication of the European Trauma Society, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond Immediate Individual Care: Monitoring Captured Free-Ranging European Wild Ungulates to Refine Protocols.Veterinary sciences · 2026Review
- Open Digital Fractures by Boar Bite.Journal of emergencies, trauma, and shockArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeWild boar (Sus scrofa) has spread and colonized urban areas. The closer contact with humans can lead to wild boar-inflicted injuries. The objectives of this study are: 1) to systematically review the literature on wild boar-inflicted injuries; 2) to describe our wild boar-inflicted wound management protocol; and 3) to analyse the features, outcomes and complications of our case series.
methodsFirst, a systematic search of the literature was performed using the PubMed (MEDLINE) electronic database. Then, our evidence-based wild boar-inflicted wound management protocol was described. Finally, a retrospective case series study including all the patients with wild boar-inflicted injuries attended in our Emergency Department (2020-2022) was analysed.
resultsFourteen studies (twelve case reports and two case series) were selected for the literature review. Our case series included 34 patients: 50.0% of them presented superficial wounds and 38.2% penetrating wounds. Most of the wounds occurred in the lower limbs (71.9%). Following our protocol, 30.0% of the wounds were primarily closed, the 70.0% of the patients received antibiotics (92.3% in penetrating injuries) and the 26.7% received an antitetanic vaccine. Only one patient (2.9%) presented a complication.
conclusionsThis study reports the first specific wild boar inflicted-wound management protocol, which led to a low complication rate. Open wounds affecting the lower limbs were the most common lesions. Care should be taken with penetrating tusk injuries. Wide-spectrum antibiotic and antitetanic treatments are recommended. Decisions on wound management should be taken case-by-case, while antirabies vaccination depends on the local status of the disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39190058What 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.