ArticleChirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany)2025
[Management of bite injuries].
Article in Chirurgie (Heidelberg, Germany), 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bite injuries cause contaminated wounds with a high risk of infection. It is a progressive process. The prognosis depends less on the extent of the surface area but more on the depth of penetration. Due to the close spatial relationships the structures in the hand are particularly at risk from bite injuries. This study evaluated the dynamics of the disease progression based on the extent of injury and the timing of treatment initiation. A total of 332 bite injuries were treated and retrospectively analyzed. The severity of injuries was classified into five grades based on the affected compartments. The evaluation of the treatment was conducted according to the timing in four groups. The infection rates increased with the severity of the injury and the elapsed time. On the day of the accident 11% of patients showed signs of infection, rising to 72% the following day under conservative treatment, and 93% if no treatment was initiated by then. Patients treated conservatively elsewhere also showed similar levels. The average number of interventions also increased with the interval between the bite and the start of treatment. Not all bites are equal. The extent matters. Cutaneous injuries show signs of infection in 23% of cases but can mostly be treated conservatively. All deeper injuries require surgical treatment with debridement, immobilization and antibiotics. After immediate surgical treatment revision was necessary in 4% of cases.
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.