Abstract：
BACKGROUND: Pyogenic flexor tenosynovitis (PFT) is a common and severe hand infection. Patients who present early can be treated with intravenous antibiotics.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether PFT caused by animal bites and treated with antibiotics leads to a different outcome than other disease etiologies due to the extensive soft tissue insult and different bacterial flora.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 43 consecutive patients who presented with PFT between 2013 and 2020. The 10 patients who presented with PFT following an animal bite were compared to those who presented with PFT caused by any other etiology.
RESULTS: Patients who were bitten pursued medical attention sooner: 1.9 ± 1.4 days compared with 5.3 ± 4.7 days (P = 0.001). Despite the quicker presentation, patients from the study group received similar antibiotic types and duration as controls. All patients were initially treated with intravenous antibiotics under surveillance of a hand surgeon. One patient (10%) from the study group and four controls (12%) were treated surgically (P = 1). Average follow-up was 17 ± 16 days. At the end of follow-up, one (10%) patient from the study group and three (9%) controls sustained mild range of motion limitation and one (3%) patient from the control group had moderate limitations (P = 0.855).
CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous antibiotic treatment, combined with an intensive hand surgeon follow-up, is a viable option for the treatment of PFT caused by animal bites.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether PFT caused by animal bites and treated with antibiotics leads to a different outcome than other disease etiologies due to the extensive soft tissue insult and different bacterial flora.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 43 consecutive patients who presented with PFT between 2013 and 2020. The 10 patients who presented with PFT following an animal bite were compared to those who presented with PFT caused by any other etiology.
RESULTS: Patients who were bitten pursued medical attention sooner: 1.9 ± 1.4 days compared with 5.3 ± 4.7 days (P = 0.001). Despite the quicker presentation, patients from the study group received similar antibiotic types and duration as controls. All patients were initially treated with intravenous antibiotics under surveillance of a hand surgeon. One patient (10%) from the study group and four controls (12%) were treated surgically (P = 1). Average follow-up was 17 ± 16 days. At the end of follow-up, one (10%) patient from the study group and three (9%) controls sustained mild range of motion limitation and one (3%) patient from the control group had moderate limitations (P = 0.855).
CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous antibiotic treatment, combined with an intensive hand surgeon follow-up, is a viable option for the treatment of PFT caused by animal bites.
摘要：
背景：化脓性屈肌腱鞘炎（PFT）是一种常见且严重的手部感染。早期出现的患者可以用静脉注射抗生素治疗。
目的：确定由动物咬伤引起的PFT和抗生素治疗是否由于广泛的软组织损伤和不同的细菌菌群而导致与其他疾病病因不同的结果。
方法：我们在2013年至2020年期间对43例PFT患者进行了回顾性队列研究。将动物咬伤后出现PFT的10例患者与由任何其他病因引起的出现PFT的患者进行比较。
结果：被咬伤的患者就医时间较早：1.9±1.4天，而5.3±4.7天（P=0.001）。尽管演示速度更快，研究组患者接受了与对照组相似的抗生素类型和持续时间.所有患者最初在手外科医生的监视下接受静脉抗生素治疗。研究组的一名患者（10％）和四名对照（12％）接受了手术治疗（P=1）。平均随访时间为17±16天。在后续行动结束时，研究组1例(10%)患者和对照组3例(9%)患者存在轻度活动限制,对照组1例(3%)患者存在中度活动限制(P=0.855).
结论：静脉抗生素治疗，结合手外科医生的密集随访，是治疗由动物叮咬引起的PFT的可行选择。
目的：确定由动物咬伤引起的PFT和抗生素治疗是否由于广泛的软组织损伤和不同的细菌菌群而导致与其他疾病病因不同的结果。
方法：我们在2013年至2020年期间对43例PFT患者进行了回顾性队列研究。将动物咬伤后出现PFT的10例患者与由任何其他病因引起的出现PFT的患者进行比较。
结果：被咬伤的患者就医时间较早：1.9±1.4天，而5.3±4.7天（P=0.001）。尽管演示速度更快，研究组患者接受了与对照组相似的抗生素类型和持续时间.所有患者最初在手外科医生的监视下接受静脉抗生素治疗。研究组的一名患者（10％）和四名对照（12％）接受了手术治疗（P=1）。平均随访时间为17±16天。在后续行动结束时，研究组1例(10%)患者和对照组3例(9%)患者存在轻度活动限制,对照组1例(3%)患者存在中度活动限制(P=0.855).
结论：静脉抗生素治疗，结合手外科医生的密集随访，是治疗由动物叮咬引起的PFT的可行选择。
