Background Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic debilitating condition. Treatment of HS depends on disease stage, goals of care, access to care, and frequency of symptoms. We present our experience with surgical treatment for patients with HS. Methods Patients were followed longitudinally for at least 2 years postsurgical intervention. Demographic data, participation in a multidisciplinary program, type of surgery, healing rates, and potential factors contributing to wound healing were retrospectively reviewed in all cases using multivariate analysis. Results Two hundred forty-eight patients met the inclusion criteria with a total of 810 involved sites. Overall, 59% of patients had Hurley stage 3 disease at the time of surgery. Healing rates of 80% were observed in stages 1 and 2, and 74% were observed in stage 3. Hurley stage was not a significant predictor of healing (P = 0.09). Surgical treatment consisted of 38% incision and drainage, 44% excision without closure, and 17% excision with primary closure. Incisional and excisional treatments healed 78% and 79%, respectively, at 2 years. Primarily repaired defects (grafts and flaps) were 68% healed at 2 years. Observed healing rates were uniform regardless of the number of sites involved (P = 0.959). Participation in the multidisciplinary program was the strongest predictor of healing (78% vs 45%, P = 0.004). Sex, age, body mass index, tobacco use, diabetes, presurgery hemoglobin, and family history of HS were statistically not significant. Continuation of immune modulating therapy within 2 weeks of surgery was a predictor of reduced healing (odds ratio, 0.23; P = 0.004), whereas holding biologics for at least 2 weeks was not significant (odds ratio, 1.99; P = 0.146). Conclusions Participation in a multidisciplinary program is a strong predictor of long-term success when treating HS. Hurley score and number of involved sites did not correlate with successful healing after surgery. If taking biologics, we identified 2 weeks as an appropriate break from biologics before and after surgical intervention. Healing rates were highest with ablative procedures (incision and drainage, excision) alone.

Purpose For many providers, hand infections among diabetic patients is a condition that necessitates focused inpatient care. These patients are believed to have decreased innate immunity to fight infection, a more virulent course, and difficulty with recovery. Diabetes is considered by some to represent an additional risk factor that can result in an unfavorable outcome if not managed in an aggressive manner. Our own experience suggests that many of these patients can be safely managed in the outpatient setting. The purpose of this project was to better define the clinical outcomes for this population. Methods Evidence-based criteria were utilized to direct inpatient versus outpatient treatment pathways. A database was developed to track hand infections treated by the specialty service. The primary outcome was the resolution of hand infection. Secondary outcomes included specific treatment responses as well as patient characteristic comparisons of the different treatment groups. Independent variables included (parenteral and enteral) antibiotic use and bedside interventions performed. Patients were followed to complete the resolution of infection. Results For all patients managed as outpatients, diabetic patients had statistically significantly decreased improvement rates at two weeks as compared to non-diabetic patients (62% vs 75%, p =0.024). This difference disappeared at two months. Among diabetic patients, those with the highest rate of recovery at two weeks (90%) received intravenous antibiotics, bedside procedures, and oral antibiotics. Patients who did not receive antibiotics or undergo bedside procedures had the lowest percent of improvement (37%). Across all treatment subgroups, bedside procedure was the most impactful intervention. Less than 10% of patients were converted from outpatient to inpatient care, both diabetic and non-diabetic. Conclusions We reviewed our experience managing diabetes mellitus hand infections treated in the outpatient setting. Appropriate and effective treatment is possible, and the results are equivalent to those of patients without diabetes mellitus.

No abstract

No abstract