ArticleScars, burns & healing
A rare scrotal burn from post-circumcision cetrimide-chlorhexidine (savlon) dressing: Case report and literature review.
Article in Scars, burns & healing. 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
Introduction: Scrotal burns resulting from wound care are a rare but preventable injury compared to the wide spectrum of post-circumcisions related complications documented. We report an inadvertent cetrimide-chlorhexidine antiseptic scrotal burns due to post-circumcision dressing and review the literature on genital chemical burns. Case Presentation: A 6-week-old baby presented with a 3-days history of worsening scrotal burns following smearing of undiluted cetrimide-chlorhexidine as dressing post-circumcision. Examination revealed a healthy baby with non-tender non-specific multiple ulcers and pan-erythematous scrotum. Wound swab isolated Klebsiella and Pseudomonas spp. Discussions: Although there was no clinical complication during procedure, the wrongful post-operative care resulted in scrotal burns. The isolated uropathogens did not result in sepsis or Fournier's gangrene, we believe this preventable burn was eventually reported due to the worsening progression over the period, albeit with minor adverse effects. Conclusion: Post-circumcision instruction for cetrimide-chlorhexidine use by caregiver must be understood to avoid scrotal burns. Lay Summary: Scrotal skin burns from chemical agent: Isolated scrotal skin burns are not common and even rarer when they are caused by prescribed medical solution. A neonate was brought in by the parents with complain of developing watery containing swellings on the scrotum that later bust and leads to peeling of the scrotal skin. The mother noticed this after applying dressing solution as part of the measures to prevent circumcision wound infection. Even though the child looked well, the large scrotal surface without skin cover could become a common point for bacteria entry into the body and its consequences. Even though our test isolated 2 different types of disease-causing bacteria from the scrotal wound, this child was managed well and the wounds healed without any further problem. The lessons: 1. circumcision is the commonest surgical procedure performed. 2. This incidence may only be the tip of the iceberg. 3. The parents brought him because it was getting worse. 4. It is a preventable injury by just using the agent in accordance with recommendations.
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.