ArticleUlusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES2026
Treatment method selection for perianal abscesses: bedside or operating room? a single center, retrospective study.
Article in Ulusal travma ve acil cerrahi dergisi = Turkish journal of trauma & emergency surgery : TJTES, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study aims to evaluate the effect of the type of intervention (bedside vs. operating room incision and drainage) on clinical outcomes in the treatment of perianal abscess and to identify predictive factors that may be effective in determining the type of intervention.
methodsA retrospective study was conducted on 213 patients who underwent incision and drainage (I&D) for cryptoglandular perianal abscess. Patients were divided into 'bedside I&D' and 'operating room I&D' groups according to the type of intervention. Demographic characteristics, laboratory values, abscess size, early complications, and long-term fistula development were compared. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was performed to determine cut-off values for white blood cell count (WBC), C-reactive protein (CRP), and abscess size; subsequently, logistic regression analyses were performed using these parameters.
resultsWBC count, CRP levels, and abscess size were statistically significantly higher in the operating room group (p<0.001). According to ROC analysis, cut-off values were determined as 14.68×10⁹/L for WBC, 55.7 mg/L for CRP, and 29.5 mm for abscess size. While CRP lost statistical significance in univariate regression analysis, WBC and abscess size were identified as independent predictive factors for determining the intervention site in multivariate analysis. During long-term follow-up, fistula development was observed significantly more frequently in the operating room group (p=0.002).
conclusionWBC level and abscess size may be valuable predictors in deciding the type of intervention for perianal abscess treatment. Bedside I&D can be safely performed in low-risk cases, whereas operating room intervention should be preferred in patients with high inflammatory markers and larger abscesses.
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.