ArticleInfection2025
A rise in severe necrotizing fasciitis- another consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic?
Article in Infection, 2025. 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.
- Review
- Cervical Necrotizing Fasciitis Across the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Single-Center Exploratory Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Article
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
purposeDuring the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions such as social distancing, lockdowns and mask mandates were imposed by Germany's government. After these interventions were abolished, an increase in group A streptococcal infections, including necrotizing fasciitis, was observed in our Level 1 trauma center. The aim of this study was to evaluate the incidence of type I and type II necrotizing fasciitis (NF) before, during and after the COVID-19 pandemic.
methods165 patients with severe NF, treated in our Level 1 trauma center, were included between 2010 and 2023. Patients were categorized into a pre-mask, mask and post-mask group, according to their date of admission relative to the COVID-19 pandemic. Clinical parameters and patient characteristics were assessed between groups.
resultsIn the pre-mask group, type I NF (69%) was more common than type II NF (31%). In the mask group 95% of patients had type I NF. In the post-mask group, Streptococcus pyogenes triggered type II NF dominated with 74% of all cases. There was a significant increase in NF type II cases in the post-mask group compared to the pre-mask and mask-group (p < 0.001). Patients with NF in the post-mask group appeared significantly healthier and tended to be younger than patients before and during the COVID-19 pandemic.
conclusionThis study supports the hypothesis that the general population has acquired an "immune debt" following the COVID-19 pandemic, resulting in an increase in necrotizing fasciitis incidence, especially triggered by Streptococcus pyogenes, after restrictions such as mask mandates and social distancing were lifted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40465081What 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.