Necrotizing Fasciitis

                                DR KS Dhillon

Introduction

In 1871 Jones first described necrotizing skin infections. At the time the term hospital gangrene was generally used (1). Wilson coined the term necrotizing fasciitis (NF) in the 1950s to describe necrosis of the fascia and subcutaneous tissue with relative sparing of the underlying muscle (2). In patients with necrotizing fasciitis there is rapid destruction of tissue, systemic toxicity, and, if not treated aggressively, gross morbidity and mortality. Early diagnosis and aggressive treatment reduces the risk. It is, however, often difficult to diagnose NF. Sometimes patients are treated for cellulitis until there is rapid deterioration (3). Antibiotic therapy with early surgical exploration and debridement is necessary for a good outcome.

Classification

There have been different classifications and terms used to describe necrotizing infections of the skin and subcutaneous tissue. Some of these include synergistic necrotizing cellulitis, streptococcal myonecrosis, necrotizing fasciitis, and gas gangrene. These classifications and terminology have been based on affected anatomy, depth of infection, and microbial cause. 

Terms such as myonecrosis, necrotizing fasciitis, and necrotizing adipositis refer to classification by depth of infection. Type 1 and type 2 infections are based on microbial cause. Necrotizing infections are classified according to anatomical sites. Fournier gangrene for example involves the perineum and Ludwig angina involves the submandibular and sublingual spaces. These infections are named after the physicians who initially described them (4,5).

These descriptive terms can cause much confusion. Anaya et al (6) recently proposed that the term necrotizing soft tissue infections should be used to describe them all, as their treatment with early surgery and broad-spectrum antibiotics is the same. 

Microbiology

NF has been classified microbiologically as either type 1 which is polymicrobial or type 2 which is monomicrobial (7). Polymicrobial infections are generally more common with a mixture of aerobic and anaerobic organisms (8). Polymicrobial infections typically occur in the trunk and perineum. These microbes reflect normal skin commensalism found adjacent to the site of infection. In NF of the perineum, anaerobic bacteria are isolated. The isolates consist of Gram-positive organisms, such as S pyogenes, staphylococcus aureus, and enterococci. Gram-negative aerobes, such as Escherichia coli and Pseudomonas species; and anaerobic organisms, such as Bacteroides or Clostridium species are also found (9,10). Type 1 NF occurs in immunocompromised individuals. These include patients with diabetes mellitus or chronic renal failure.

Polymicrobial infections are more common than monomicrobial infections. These infections typically occur in the limbs and affect healthy patients with no implicative comorbidities. There is usually a history of trivial trauma. The usual pathogens are S pyogenes and S aureus. Type 2 NF might be associated with toxic shock syndrome (6). Community-acquired methicillin-resistant S aureus (MRSA) has become common in NF. A recent retrospective review by Miller et al of cases from 2000 to 2006 in Los Angeles, California, showed MRSA isolates in one-third of cases (10).

Pathology

Most cases start with trauma to the skin surface. A penetrative injury or even acupuncture needles can seed bacteria into the deeper tissues. The infection begins in the deep tissue planes, and the epidermis might not be affected initially. The clinical disease becomes obvious when the bacteria spreads through the tissue along the deep fascia. After the bacteria has penetrated the deeper tissues, they rapidly multiply within viable tissue. Fibrous attachments between subcutaneous tissues and fascias limit the spread to areas like the feet, hands, and scalp. The lack of fibrous attachments in the trunk and limbs can lead to widespread infection and tissue damage. Infection also spreads to lymphatic and venous channels. This leads to edema. The spread of bacteria can cause thrombosis of blood vessels in the dermal papilla. This can result in ischemia and gangrene of subcutaneous fat and dermis (11). If the fascia is breached, infection of the muscle occurs which can lead to myositis. The gas-producing organisms such as Clostridium species can produce subcutaneous gas leading to gas gangrene.

Infections with toxin-producing bacteria such as S aureus and S pyogenes can lead to a toxic shock-like syndrome. Seemingly limited infection can produce septic shock and multiorgan failure.

Risk factors

Patients presenting with NF usually have some predisposition to infection. Predisposing risk factors include: 

• Diabetes

• Chronic disease

• Peripheral vascular disease

• Renal failure

• Underlying malignancy

• Immunosuppressive drugs (eg, prednisolone)

• Malnutrition

• Age > 60 years

• Intravenous drug misuse

• Obesity

A Singapore study by Wong et al showed that 70.3% of patients with NF had diabetes mellitus (12). Most patients have a history of trauma, surgery, or penetrating injury. The injury, however, can be quite trivial such as due to insect bites or scratches. 

NSAID use has been implicated in severe necrotizing streptococcal infections. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs apparently impair lymphocyte function. Anecdotal reports suggest that there is an association between the use of NSAIDs and the progression of invasive group A streptococcal infections to shock and multiorgan failure (13). However, it could also be possible that suppression of symptoms and signs of inflammation leads to a delay in diagnosis, especially in patients presenting early with nonspecific symptoms (14).

In the pediatric population, risk factors for NF include malnutrition and skin infections such as varicella (15,16).

It is important not to rule out NF in normal healthy patients with minor dermatologic trauma. 

Clinical features

Patients having NF can present with constitutional symptoms of sepsis such as tachycardia, fever, altered mental state, and diabetic ketoacidosis alone or with evidence of skin inflammation. Infection commonly occurs on the limbs.

According to a retrospective review by Golger et al of patients treated for NF in 3 tertiary hospitals in Canada, the common sites of infection were the lower extremities (28%), upper extremities (27%), perineum (21%), trunk (18%), and the head and neck (5%) (17). NF often first starts in the deep tissue planes, hence at initial presentation, there might be minimal epidermal involvement. This makes it difficult to differentiate from cellulitis and non-necrotizing skin infections.

Patients with NF often have systemic toxicity. They initially present with fever which is greater than 38°C, diaphoresis, tachycardia, and even an altered mental state or diabetic ketoacidosis. Physical examination includes all parts of the body to search for inflammation of the skin. This is necessary, especially in patients who present with sepsis where the source is not obvious. The oral cavity and perineum are areas that can be easily missed (18).

Most patients with NF present with signs and symptoms of skin inflammation such as pain, erythema, and skin edema. Such signs and symptoms, however, are also present in less serious conditions such as cellulitis and erysipelas. The degree of pain relative to the skin condition might provide the physician with clues. NF usually presents with pain that is out of proportion to the degree of skin inflammation.

Erysipelas is an infection of the superficial dermis. It has well-defined borders and can blister profoundly. In patients with cellulitis, there is erythema with lymphangitis and some blistering.

NF usually presents with patchy discolouration of the skin with swelling and pain but without a defined margin or lymphangitis (11,19) Fig 1. 

Fig 1

Progression of NF is associated with the development of tense edema, vesicles, bullae, necrosis, a grayish-brown discharge, and crepitus (20). Hemorrhagic bullae and crepitus are signs that there is likelihood of underlying fascia and muscle being compromised (21). Crepitus is a later sign that is found in only about 18% of the cases (9).

Crepitus and blistering are the most specific signs of necrotizing soft tissue infection. They are however not diagnostic. Retrospective case series, by Wang et al (13) and Elliot et al (22) showed the absence of crepitus in 62% to 63% of cases and an absence of blistering in 76% to 95% of cases on initial presentation. Lymphangitis and lymphadenopathy are absent in necrotizing infections, but they remain features of cellulitis (11,19).

Localized pain is another feature of NF. Since the disease is a deep-seated infection, the epidermis is minimally involved at first presentation. The patient may complain of pain that is out of proportion to the degree of dermal involvement or pain that extends past the margin of infection (20). The pain due to cellulitis can be treated with analgesics. The pain in patients with NF is often severe. This can make the patient exceedingly apprehensive and very fearful when examined. Certain patients like those with diabetic neuropathy with loss of sensation, can experience minimal pain leading to a missed diagnosis. This is likely in concealed sites of infection, such as the oral cavity or perineum. There can be a patch of anesthesia over the site of erythema. This is believed to be due to infarction of cutaneous nerves in necrotic subcutaneous fascia and soft tissue (23).

Disease progression

Progression of necrotizing fasciitis can follow a subacute or a hyperacute course. Patients with a hyperacute course present with sepsis and multiorgan failure. The diagnosis of sepsis is obvious, and these patients need to be hospitalized.

A subacute variation of NF has been described by several authors (24-26). Patients with this subacute variant have an indolent disease course, with festering soft tissue infection. Once the infection reaches a certain threshold, sudden deterioration occurs. Aggressive surgical debridement is needed in these cases. Progression of disease invariably occurs in this group. A delay in diagnosis can lead to greater soft tissue loss and mortality (24-26). Wong et al (25) described this entity of subacute NF as having a slow indolent course with an absence of systemic disturbance. They showed that there is gradual tissue necrosis with progressive cutaneous changes over the affected site. The progression of disease occurs despite the use of antimicrobial medications. This progression of disease leads to a sudden deterioration with rapid progression of NF or systemic features of sepsis (25).

Subacute NF can present a diagnostic dilemma hence there is a need to be aware of it. 

Hospitalization

Clinical judgment is necessary to decide which patients who present with evidence of skin inflammation should be hospitalized or receive further evaluation. Studies have shown that only 15% to 34% of patients with a discharge diagnosis of necrotizing skin and subcutaneous infection had an admitting diagnosis of NF (12,27).

Some patients with non-necrotizing soft tissue infections will require hospitalization. A history of pyrexia, diabetes mellitus, hand infections, and an area of inflammation greater than 70 square cm are independent predictors of hospitalization (28).

Patients with soft tissue infection who have signs and symptoms of systemic toxicity such as hypothermia, fever, tachycardia, hypotension, an altered mental state, severe infection, intractable nausea and vomiting, immunocompromise, failure of outpatient treatment, and poor social support would require hospitalization. The Infectious Diseases Society of America skin and soft tissue infection guidelines suggest that hospitalization should be considered in patients who have hypotension and/or an elevated creatinine level, low serum bicarbonate level, elevated creatine phosphokinase level, or a C-reactive protein level of more than 13 mg/L (29).

Cutaneous manifestations are a continuum in the early stages of NF. The signs and symptoms evolve over time (3). At the first encounter, the doctor might diagnose uncomplicated cellulitis, it is however prudent to advise the patient early review if symptoms or signs progress.

Diagnosis and surgical exploration

The diagnosis of NF is confirmed by obtaining tissue for histology during surgical exploration. When surgical exploration is carried out tissue integrity and depth of invasion can be assessed. Necrosis of the fascia and loss of fascial integrity indicates necrotizing infection. Muscle involvement is seen in the advanced stage of the disease.

Laboratory and radiologic tests are sometimes useful to help decide which patients require surgical exploration, especially in those with equivocal clinical signs.

Leukocytosis with neutrophilia, acidosis, impaired renal function, raised creatinine kinase levels, altered coagulation profile, and raised inflammatory markers, such as C-reactive protein levels, are all useful if viewed within the whole clinical context.

Clinical scores such as the laboratory risk indicator for NF (LRINEC) score are available to help diagnose NF and differentiate it from other soft tissue and skin infections (11,30- 35). A score of 6 and above indicates NF. A study by Brogan et al (16) showed that an intermediate to high risk of NF had a positive predictive value of 92% and a negative predictive value of 96%. The LRINEC score was based on retrospective studies of patients with highly suspected or diagnosed NF. It has, however, not been validated in patients for whom the diagnosis of NF is not apparent in the initial assessment. Blood cultures are usually part of the workup in hospitals. The blood cultures can yield up to 27.3% positive cultures in necrotizing infections (8) compared with 2% positive blood culture yield in patients with cellulitis (36).

In patients with NF plain X-rays can show subcutaneous gas. This is however not a sensitive finding. It is positive in fewer than 25% of cases. The absence of gas does not exclude NF (37). When the diagnosis is in doubt and the signs are equivocal computed tomography (CT) scans and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) might be useful. Important imaging findings include fat stranding, asymmetrical fascial thickening, and gas tracking along fascial planes. CT scans are estimated to have a sensitivity of 80% for detecting necrotizing soft tissue infections (38). An MRI will show subcutaneous thickening with fluid collection in patients with cellulitis. When there is deep fascia involvement with fluid collection, enhancement, and thickening, following contrast administration, necrotizing infections has to be considered (36). Schmid et al (39) in a study showed that the sensitivity of MRI is 100% with a specificity of 86% in patients with NF. This has been disputed by other authors who have stated that in early cases of NF, MRI might not show fascial involvement (40). If the clinical suspicion is high, doctors can opt to explore and perform tissue biopsies. 

Bedside tests that can be carried out include needle aspiration and incision biopsy. Negative results do not, however, exclude NF. Surgical exploration should be carried out.

The diagnosis of NF is clinical, and the clinician obtains information from both the patient’s condition and the various tests done. There has to be a high index of suspicion and a low threshold for surgical referral.

Surgical exploration will show gray necrotic tissue, “dishwater” pus, noncontracting muscle, lack of bleeding, thrombosed vessels, and a positive “finger test” result. The “finger test” is characterized by a lack of resistance to finger dissection in normally adherent tissues (6).

Treatment

Once the diagnosis has been made the treatment should begin immediately on multiple fronts. Urgent surgical consultation is obtained with the intention of early wound debridement for excision of all nonviable tissue, collection of tissue cultures, and delineation of the extent of the disease. This is important as tissue hypoxia limits the efficacy of intravenous antibiotics. Patients are often incredulous when told they need an extensive operation for their skin infection. They have to be educated about the gravity of their condition and the risk of increased mortality if surgery is not performed.

Wide-spectrum intravenous antibiotics are started while waiting for the blood culture results. These antibiotics should cover S pyogenes, S aureus, Gram-negative aerobes, and anaerobes. Gram-negative organisms are likely in the abdominal wall and perineal wounds, necrotic diabetic foot ulcers, and in heavily contaminated wounds.

Hyperbaric oxygen has also been used in addition to antibiotics and surgery. The role of hyperbaric oxygen is still ill-defined. Some authors have reported a reduction in morbidity, mortality, and the need for repeated debridement in up to about two-thirds of cases (41,42). Well-controlled randomized trials are however lacking. A retrospective review by Golger et al showed that morbidity associated with NF was higher in patients who had hyperbaric oxygen therapy (17).

Intravenous immunoglobulins might play a therapeutic role in type 2 NF caused by streptococci resulting in streptococcal toxic shock syndrome. Recently, a multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial by Darenberg et al (43) evaluated the safety and efficacy of intravenous immunoglobulins in streptococcal toxic shock syndrome. Although the trial was prematurely stopped because of poor recruitment, it however showed a 3.6-fold higher mortality in the placebo group compared with the treatment group.

Prognosis

Mortality due to necrotizing fascitis can be considerable. Without surgical intervention, mortality can approach 100%. When Jones first reported necrotizing infections the mortality was 46% (1). Recent data shows a mortality rate of 16.4% for community-acquired necrotizing soft tissue infections (44) and 36.3% for postprocedural necrotizing infections (45). All the patients in these studies were managed in hospitals with intravenous antibiotics and surgical interventions. Despite the medical progress in the last 135 years, mortality is still high. In patients with streptococcal toxic shock syndrome, the mortality is higher. In diabetic patients, especially those presenting with diabetic ketoacidosis or hyperosmolar hyperglycemic nonketotic acidosis the death rates are higher and the hospital stay longer (46). A delay in performing surgery of more than 24 hours is an independent risk factor for mortality (12).

There can be considerable postoperative morbidity, especially when there is extensive debridement resulting in muscle loss. Patients usually have to undergo a period of rehabilitation to regain the function of the areas affected. Disfigurement and scaring can be substantial.

Prophylaxis

Since NF is a potentially lethal disease the question arises whether those in close contact with the patient should be given chemoprophylaxis. This is particularly so in patients with type 2 infections caused by S pyogenes since this organism is highly contagious and has been responsible for epidemics of pharyngitis, scarlet fever, and surgical wound infections. The United Kingdom and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention both affirm that antibiotic prophylaxis is not warranted given currently available evidence (47-49). It is recommended that healthcare workers inform and educate household contacts of patients with invasive group A streptococcal infections, to seek medical attention immediately if they develop any symptoms.

Conclusion

Necrotizing fasciitis is a potentially life-threatening medical emergency that encompasses a devastating and rapidly spreading destruction of soft tissue with associated systemic toxicity. 

NF is a rare diagnosis with a wide spectrum of presentations. The most important challenge associated with NF is establishing an early diagnosis. Initially, the skin may not be involved, which can delay treatment in patients who may appear healthy. In the initial stages, NF may be confused with cellulitis or other superficial skin infections.

The infection can be located anywhere in the body. There can be rapid progression of the infection with hyperacute systemic deterioration of the patient.

The spread of the infection can lead to limb amputation. The risk for mortality is estimated to be 15-35%. This can however reach 100% if source control is not obtained. The rapid clinical course is related to microbial virulence. Most cases are polymicrobial with organisms such as group A beta-hemolytic Streptococcus or Streptococcus pyogenes. The most important factors in patient survival are time to diagnosis and debridement.

The definitive treatment remains early and aggressive surgical intervention. Delay in treatment often results in increased risks of morbidity and mortality.​

References

1. Jones J United States Sanitary Commission. Surgical memoirs of the War of the Rebellion. New York, NY: Hurd and Houghton; 1871. Investigation upon the nature, causes and treatment of hospital gangrene as prevailed in the Confederate armies 1861–1865; pp. 142–580.

2. Wilson B. Necrotising fasciitis. Am Surg. 1952;18(4):416–31.

3. Wang YS, Wong CH, Tay YK. Staging of necrotising fasciitis based on the evolving cutaneous features. Int J Dermatol. 2007;46(10): 1036–41.

4. Fournier JA. Gangrène foudroyante de la verge. Sem Med. 1883; 3:345–8. 

5. Wasson J, Hopkins C, Bowdler D. Did Ludwig’s angina kill Ludwig? J Laryngol Otol. 2006;120(5):363–5.

6. Anaya DA, Dellinger EP. Necrotizing soft tissue infection: diagnosis and management. Clin Infect Dis. 2007;44(5):705–10. Epub 2007 Jan 22.

7. File TM, Jr, Tan JS, DiPersio JR. Group A streptococcal necrotizing fasciitis. Diagnosing and treating the “flesh-eating bacteria syndrome” Cleve Clin J Med. 1998;65(5):241–9. 

8. Elliot D, Kufera JA, Myers RA. The microbiology of necrotizing soft tissue infections. Am J Surg. 2000;179(5):361–6.

9. Sudarsky LA, Laschinger JC, Coppa GF, Spencer FC. Improved results from a standardized approach in treating patients with necrotizing fasciitis. Ann Surg. 1987;206(5):661–5. 

10. Miller LG, Perdreau-Remington F, Rieg G, Mehdi S, Perlroth J, Bayer AS, et al. Necrotizing fasciitis caused by community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus in Los Angeles. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(14):1445–53.

11. Seal DV. Necrotizing fasciitis. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2001;14(2): 127–32.

12. Wong CH, Chang HC, Pasupathy S, Khin LW, Tan JL, Low CO. Necrotizing fasciitis: clinical presentation, microbiology, and determinants of mortality. J Bone Joint Surgery Am. 2003;85-A(8): 1454–60.

13. Stevens DL. Could nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) enhance the progression of bacterial infections to toxic shock syndrome? Clin Infect Dis. 1995;21(4):977–80.

14. Aronoff DM, Bloch KC. Assessing the use of nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and necrotising fasciitis caused by group A streptococcus. Medicine (Baltimore) 2003;82(4):225–35.

15. Fustes-Morales A, Gutierrez-Castrellon P, Duran-Mckinster C, Orozco-Covarrubias L, Tamayo-Sanchez L, Ruiz-Maldonado R. Necrotizing fasciitis: report of 39 paediatric cases. Arch Dermatol. 2002;138(7):893–9. 

16. Brogan TV, Nizet V, Waldhausen JH, Rubens CE, Clarke WR. Group A streptococcal necrotizing fasciitis complicating primary varicella: a series of fourteen patients. Pediatr Infect Dis J. 1995;14(7):588–94.

17. Golger A, Ching S, Goldsmith CH, Pennie RA, Bain JR. Mortality in patients with necrotizing fasciitis. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2007;119(6):1803–7.

18. Hill MK, Sanders CV. Necrotizing and gangrenous soft tissue infections. In: Sanders CV, Nesbitt LT Jr, editors. The skin and infection: a color atlas and text. Baltimore, MD: Lipincott, Williams & Wilkins; 1995. pp. 62–75.

19. Green RJ, Dafoe DC, Raffin TA. Necrotizing fasciitis. Chest. 1996;110(1):219–29.

20. Headley AJ. Necrotizing soft tissue infections: a primary care review. Am Fam Physician. 2003;68(2):323–8.

21. Hsiao CT, Lin LJ, Shiao CJ, Hsiao KY, Chen IC. Hemorrhagic bullae are not only skin deep. Am J Emerg Med. 2008;26(3):316–9.

22. Elliot DC, Kufera JA, Myers RA. Necrotizing soft tissue infections. Risk factors for mortality and strategies for management. Ann Surg. 1996;224(5):672–83.

23. Dufel S, Martino M. Simple cellulitis or a more serious infection? J Fam Pract. 2006;55(5):396–400.

24. Wong CH, Wang YS. The diagnosis of necrotizing fasciitis. Curr Opin Infect Dis. 2005;18(2):101–6. 

25. Wong CH, Wang TS. What is subacute necrotising fasciitis? A proposed clinical diagnostic criteria. J Infect. 2006;52(6):415–9. Epub 2005 Oct 6. 

26. Jarrett P, Rademaker M, Duffill M. The clinical spectrum of necrotising fasciitis. A review of 15 cases. Aust N Z J Med. 1997;27(1):29–34.

27. Hefny AF, Eid HO, Al-Hussona M, Idris KM, Abu-Zidan FM. Necrotizing fasciitis: a challenging diagnosis. Eur J Emerg Med. 2007;14(1):50–2.

28. Diercks DB, Kuppermann N, Derlet RW, Ernst AA. Derivation and validation of a model for the need of hospital admission in patients with extremity cellulitis. Acad Emerg Med. 2000;7(5):562.

29. Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, Everett ED, Dellinger P, Goldstein EJ, et al. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft-tissue infections. Clin Infect Dis. 2005;41(10):1373–406. Epub 2005 Oct 14.

30. Green RJ, Dafoe DC, Raffin TA. Necrotizing fasciitis. Chest. 1996;110(1):219–29. 

31. Headley AJ. Necrotizing soft tissue infections: a primary care review. Am Fam Physician. 2003;68(2):323–8.

32. Hsiao CT, Lin LJ, Shiao CJ, Hsiao KY, Chen IC. Hemorrhagic bullae are not only skin deep. Am J Emerg Med. 2008;26(3):316–9. 

33. Elliot DC, Kufera JA, Myers RA. Necrotizing soft tissue infections. Risk factors for mortality and strategies for management. Ann Surg. 1996;224(5):672–83. 

34. Dufel S, Martino M. Simple cellulitis or a more serious infection? J Fam Pract. 2006;55(5):396–400.

35. Wong CH, Khin LW, Heng KS, Tan KC, Low CO. The LRINEC (laboratory risk indicator for necrotizing fasciitis) score: a tool for distinguishing necrotizing fasciitis from other soft tissue infections. Crit Care Med. 2004;32(7):1535–41.

36. Perl B, Gottehrer NP, Raveh D, Schlesinger Y, Rudensky B, Yinnon AM. Cost-effectiveness of blood cultures for adult patients with cellulitis. Clin Infect Dis. 1999;29(6):1483–8.

37. Lim YJ, Yong FC, Wong CH, Tan AB. Necrotising fasciitis and traditional medical therapy—a dangerous liaison. Ann Acad Med Singapore. 2006;35(4):270–3.

38. Wyoski MG, Santora TA, Shah RM, Friedman AC. Necrotizing fasciitis: CT characteristics. Radiology. 1997;203(3):859–63.

39. Schmid MR, Kossmann T, Duewell S. Differentiation of necrotizing fasciitis and cellulitis using MR imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;170(3):615–20.

40. Arslan A, Pierre-Jerome C, Borthne A. Necrotizing fasciitis: unreliable MRI findings in the preoperative diagnosis. Eur J Radiol. 2000;36(3):139–43.

41. Riseman JA, Zamboni WA, Curtis A, Graham DR, Konrad HR, Ross DS. Hyperbaric oxygen therapy for necrotizing fasciitis reduces mortality and the need for debridements. Surgery. 1990;108(5):847–50. 

42. Jallali N, Withey S, Butler PE. Hyperbaric oxygen as adjuvant therapy in the management of necrotizing fasciitis. Am J Surg. 2005;189(4):462–6.

43. Darenberg J, Ihendyane N, Sjölin J, Aufwerber E, Haidl S, Follin P, et al. Intravenous immunoglobulin G therapy in streptococcal toxic shock syndrome: a European randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Clin Infect Dis. 2003;37(3):333–40. 

44. Frazee BW, Fee C, Lynn J, Wang R, Bostrom A, Hargis C, et al. Community-acquired necrotizing soft tissue infections: a review of 122 cases presenting to a single emergency department over 12 years. J Emerg Med. 2008;34(2):139–46. Epub 2007 Aug 29. 

45. Miller AT, Saadai P, Greenstein A, Divino CM. Postprocedural necrotizing fasciitis: a 10-year retrospective review. Am Surg. 2008;74(5):405–9.

46. Oncul O, Erenoglu C, Top C, Küçükardali Y, Karabudak O, Kurt Y, et al. Necrotizing fasciitis: a life-threatening clinical disorder in uncontrolled type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2008;80(2):218–23. Epub 2008 Jan 10.

47. Health Protection Agency, Group A Streptococcus Working Group. Interim UK guidelines for management of close community contacts of invasive group A streptococcal disease. Commun Dis Public Health. 2004;7(4):354–61. 

48. Smith A, Lamagni TL, Oliver I, Efstratiou A, George RC, Stuart JM. Invasive group A streptococcal disease: should close contacts routinely receive antibiotic prophylaxis? Lancet Infect Dis. 2005;5(8):494–500. 

49. Prevention of Invasive Group A Streptococcal Infections Workshop Participants. Prevention of invasive group A streptococcal disease among household contacts of case patients and among postpartum and postsurgical patients: recommendations from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Clin Infect Dis. 2002;35(8):950–9. Epub 2002 Sep 26. Erratum in: Clin Infect Dis 2003;36(2):243.

 Lateral Patellar Compression Syndrome

                                  Dr. KS Dhillon

Among young and active individuals anterior knee pain is one of the most common musculoskeletal complaints (1-3). The constant anterior knee pain can be disabling and it can limit daily functional activities. The pathogenesis of anterior knee pain is multifactorial. Primary contributors to this pain include patella instability and overload of the subchondral bone (4). In some patients with anterior knee pain, no predisposing subluxation can be found (5,6). Patellar compression syndrome also previously known as excessive lateral pressure syndrome is a disorder that is associated with overload and increased pressure on the lateral facet due to pathologic lateral soft-tissue restraints (5,7,8). Patellofemoral malalignment causes an increase in Q angle which results in greater surface contact between the lateral aspect of the patella and the lateral condyle of the femur during weight-bearing activities (9).

When the knee is flexed there is an increase in posterolateral compressive forces on the lateral aspect of the patella. This is consistent with the clinical observation that most patients with anterior knee pain tolerate prolonged knee flexion poorly (5,7,10).  Since the contact pressure over the lateral patellar facet increases as knee flexion progresses, a more specific term to identify the pathologic process would be lateral patellar pressure in flexion or lateral pressure in flexion (LPIF).

Arthroscopic lateral retinacular release is a common procedure that is used to alleviate the pathologic forces on the patella in LPIF. This procedure can however be associated with a serious complication i.e. iatrogenic medial patellar subluxation. Medial patella subluxation can worsen the patient’s knee pain and it will require further stabilization procedures (11-13). The arthroscopic release that is often done usually does not extend distal enough to relieve the pressure in flexion (14). The length of the release, especially in the distal direction determines the biomechanical effects of lateral release. Most lateral releases are performed with the knee in extension and not in flexion which is the position of maximum contact pressure. The release extends inferiorly only as far as the joint line or anterolateral inferior arthroscopic portal. The clinically necessary

amount of release is not known with certainty. Extending the release distally to the level of the tibiofemoral joint line does result in measurable increase in patellar mobility.

To overcome the shortcomings of the traditional arthroscopic lateral release procedures a new technique was developed to perform a lateral release. The release is performed open with the knee in flexion. The lateral release is then repaired with a rotation flap of the iliotibial band to close the defect and prevent patellar subluxation. This technique decreases lateral patellar pressure and centers the patella in the trochlear groove thereby reducing the risk of iatrogenic patellar instability. 

Diagnosis

Patients with LPIF complain of constant anterior knee pain. The pain is localized at the inferomedial aspect of the patella and the anteromedial joint line, in the course of the medial patellotibial ligament. The patients have pain with prolonged knee flexion or when they climb or descend stairs. Knee extension is limited and painful. The pain is not relieved by bracing, medications, or physical therapy. Lateral patellar compression in flexion can be confirmed by clinical examination. There is focal tenderness at the inferomedial aspect of the patella and/or the anteromedial joint line. There is no joint effusion or crepitus. The patella is stable in both flexion and extension. LPIF can be tested by manually centering the patella in the trochlea at 45 degrees of knee flexion and during active knee extension and flexion. 

The knee is examined with the patient in a seated position. The patient will have pain at rest. The pain can be reproduced with knee motion. The pain will limit extension and it will increase as the knee approaches 90 of flexion. Attempts to center the patella in the trochlea by pushing the patella medially will usually provide immediate relief of the pain by reducing tension on the medial patellotibial ligament. Full knee extension is possible.

When centering the patella decreases the patient’s pain and allows a

greater pain-free range of motion, particularly in extension, LPIF is likely.

To verify the diagnosis of lateral patellar pressure in flexion the patient is examined under anesthesia. Metcalf (15) and other authors (16) described the lateral overhang sign seen during diagnostic arthroscopy. Mild overhang is present in most normal knees in full extension. Patella overhang that includes the complete lateral facet or 50% of the surface of the patella is considered abnormal. Lateral-sided tightness can be seen when the patellofemoral articulation is viewed from the anteromedial arthroscopic portal. In knee extension, the lateral retinaculum may or may not be tight. With flexion of the knee, the inferolateral corner of the patella begins to tighten. When flexion of the knee increases, the lateral facet of the patella becomes compressed over the lateral femoral condyle. At 90 degrees of knee flexion, the patella is tight over the lateral femur and it is not congruent with the trochlea. Pressure leads to a concave shape of the lateral facet. 

Surgical Technique

With the patient in a supine position, a tourniquet is applied on the thigh. Arthroscopy is performed and the intra-articular findings are noted.

Evaluation of patellar alignment and position, the shape of the patella and the femoral trochlea, laxity on both the lateral and medial sides, and the degree of lateral-side tightness is carried out. Assessment of patellar stability is also carried out. The patellofemoral, lateral, and medial compartments are examined for the presence of chondral injuries.

Loose bodies are removed and chondroplasty is performed if necessary. Meniscal pathology is treated if necessary. A midline skin incision is made. The patella and patellar mechanism from the patella to the tibial tubercle is exposed. The lateral side of the patellar tendon is freed. The lateral retinaculum is opened at the inferolateral tip of the patella. The release is carried far enough proximally to allow the patella to center in the trochlear groove. There is no need for

the release to extend past the superior pole of the patella. A tibial osteotomy may be necessary if there is excessive lateralization of the tibial tubercle. The tibial tubercle osteotomy allows the tubercle to be placed anteriorly and medially. If there is patella baja, the tubercle is recessed more proximally. The patellar tendon is then freed on the medial side. The tibial tubercle is cut with a saw and rotated medially and anteriorly. It may be moved upward or downward. The alignment and pressure on the patellar tendon can be corrected by fixing the tubercle in the desired position. The tubercle is fixed to the tibia with 2 screws. The bony defect created on the lateral side can be filled with synthetic bone graft. After the tibial tubercle is fixed, the lateral release is repaired by rotating a flap of adjacent iliotibial band to fill the defect. This prevents lateral side laxity and medial subluxation of the patella. 

If the lateral side is very lax, the lateral release is extended into the vastus lateralis tendon. The tendon can be overlapped. This will tighten the lateral structures above the patella. The lower part of the lateral release is repaired. 

Repeat arthroscopy is performed to see resolution of the LPIF and to see if the patella is centered within the femoral trochlea. The patella is examined for stability. Lateral and medial forces are applied to the patella in full extension and 30 degrees of flexion to assess for medial and lateral patellar stability. If necessary, soft-tissue reconstructions are performed.

Postoperatively a knee brace is applied and the patient is taught active range-of-motion and quadriceps-strengthening exercises. The patient is allowed to weight bear as tolerated with crutches for 2 to 4 weeks. The knee brace is removed when the patient has gained good quadriceps control.

Discussion

There is a need to know the normal anatomy and kinematics of the patellofemoral joint to understand the pathologic process of LPIF. The lateral retinaculum is a richly innervated connective tissue structure. It is located on the lateral aspect of the knee (4). The lateral retinaculum is composed of 2 layers (17,18). The superficial layer is composed of oblique fibers of the lateral retinaculum originating from the vastus lateralis fascia and iliotibial band and inserting into the patella tendon and the lateral margin of the patella. The deep layer of the retinaculum consists of several structures. These include the transverse and lateral patellofemoral ligaments and the patellotibial band. The deep layer is oriented longitudinally with the knee extended but exerts a posterolateral force on the lateral aspect of the patella as the knee goes into flexion (10).

The lateral and medial forces are balanced in a normal knee. The patella glides smoothly in the femoral trochlea. Any change in this mediolateral equilibrium can lead to instability and pain (14). When the knee is extended the patella lies laterally, but as the knee is flexed, the patella moves medially and it engages in the trochlea. With further knee flexion the patella flexes and translates distally (19). With the knee in 45° flexion, the patella is fully engaged in the trochlear groove. 

As the knee flexes more the patella moves laterally. There is a progressive increase in patellofemoral joint contact area from 0° to 60° of knee flexion. There is greater lateral facet contact area compared with the medial facet contact area as the knee flexes more.

Lateral retinacular release is carried out to relieve peripatellar pain and to reduce the pathologic lateral forces contributing to abnormal lateral pressure. Biomechanical effects of the lateral release are related to the length of the release, especially in the distal direction. The arthroscopic lateral release is performed with the knee in extension and not in flexion. The release extends inferiorly as far as the joint line or anterolateral inferior arthroscopic portal (14).

Marumoto et al (14) carried out a biomechanical comparison of lateral releases. They found that release of the patellar lateral restraints, when extended down to the tibial tubercle, was significantly increased compared with a release that extends only to the level of the anterolateral inferior arthroscopic portal. 

Ostermeier et al (7) investigated the influence of lateral retinacular release and lateral and medial retinacular deficiency on patellofemoral position and retropatellar contact pressure. Their lateral release extended from 20 mm proximal to the proximal aspect of the patella to the Gerdy tubercle. They found that lateral retinacular release could decrease pressure on the lateral patellar facet in knee flexion in patients with anterior knee pain without instability but with overload of the lateral facet of the patella. When lateral release in flexion is done, the posteriorly directed force of the lateral retinaculum and iliotibial band is removed. The patella then moves in an anterior direction, alleviating the pressure on the lateral facet.

Powers et al (18) found an increase in patellar tendon tension after the removal of the peripatellar retinaculum. This indicates that the lateral retinaculum acts as a load-transmitting structure within the extensor mechanism. They found that at 60° of knee flexion, there was a 9.6% increase in patellar tendon tension when the retinaculum was removed. They were of the opinion that with increasing knee flexion angles, there would be increased load sharing of the retinaculum. Releasing the lateral retinaculum in patients with anterior knee pain may impair its load-sharing capability and increase the forces on the patellar tendon. This increase in patellar tendon tension would lead to greater joint compression. If the lateral release is repaired with an iliotibial band rotation flap, the load-sharing function of the lateral retinaculum can be restored and patellofemoral contact pressures normalized.

The position of the tibial tubercle can contribute to overloading the cartilage on the lateral facet of the patella and cause pain (20,21). Anteromedialization of the tibial tubercle can be done to improve patellofemoral alignment (22). In patients with excessive lateralization of the tibial tubercle, lateral retinacular release alone is not sufficient to adequately reduce pressure on the lateral facet of the patella. In such patients, a tibial tubercle osteotomy is needed. Medializing the tibial tubercle by 1 cm significantly reduces the maximum lateral pressure by 15% to 20% for intact cartilage without overloading the medial cartilage (23). The degree of anteromedialization will depend on the amount of correction needed. Some of the patients have excessive lateralization and require significant correction. Others require a more modest correction. The Q angle is reduced to 0 degrees by correctly aligning the bony tubercle and the patellar tendon. Both under-correction and over-correction are undesirable for improving patellofemoral alignment and normalizing contact pressures.

References

1. Sanchis-Alfonso V, ed. Anterior knee pain and patellar instability. London: Springer, 2006.

2. Post WR. Anterior knee pain: Diagnosis and treatment. Am Acad Orthop Surg 2005;13:534-543.

3. Witvrouw E, Callaghan MJ, Stefanik JJ, et al. Patellofemoral pain: Consensus statement from the 3rd International Patellofemoral Pain Research Retreat held in Vancouver, September 2013. Br J Sports Med 2014;48:411-414.

4. Zaffagnini S, Dejour D, Arendt E, eds. Patellofemoral pain, instability, and arthritis. Berlin: Springer Verlag, 2010.

5. Larson RL, Cabaud HE, Slocum DB, James SL, Keenan T,

Hutchinson T. The patellar compression syndrome: Surgical treatment by lateral retinacular release. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1978;134:158-167.

6. Fulkerson JP. Patellofemoral pain disorders: Evaluation and management. J Am Acad Orthop Surg 1994;2:124-132.

7. Ostermeier S, Holst M, Hurschler C, Windhagen H, Stukenborg-Colsman C. Dynamic measurement of patellofemoral kinematics and contact pressure after lateral retinacular release: An in vitro study. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 2007;15:547-554.

8. Bentley G, Dowd G. Current concepts of etiology and treatment of chondromalacia patellae. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1984;189:209-228.

9. Chen Y-J, Powers CM. The dynamic quadriceps angle: A comparison of persons with and without patellofemoral pain. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2010;40:A24-A25.

10. Johnson R. Lateral facet syndrome of the patella. Lateral restraint analysis and use of lateral resection. Clin Orthop Relat Res 1989; 238:148-158.

11. Abhaykumar S, Craig DM. Fascia lata sling reconstruction for recurrent medial dislocation of the patella. Knee 1999;6:55-57.

12. Hughston JC, Flandry F, Brinker MR, Terry GC, Mills JC III. Surgical correction of medial subluxation of the patella. Am J Sports Med 1996;24:486-491.

13. Nonweiler DE, DeLee JC. The diagnosis and treatment of medial subluxation of the patella after lateral retinacular release. Am J Sports Med 1994;22:680-686.

14. Marumoto JM, Jordan C, Akins R. A biomechanical comparison of lateral retinacular releases. Am J Sports Med 1995;23:151-155.

15. Metcalf R. An arthroscopic method for lateral release of subluxating or dislocating patella. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1982;167:9–18. 

16. Dzioba R.B., Strokon A., Mulbry L. Diagnostic arthroscopy and longitudinal open lateral release: A safe and effective treatment for “chondromalacia patella.” Arthroscopy. 1985;1:131–135. 

17. Fulkerson J.P., Gossling H. Anatomy of the knee joint lateral retinaculum. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1980;153:183–188. 

18. Powers C.M., Chen Y.-J., Farrokhi S., Lee T.Q. Role of peripatellar retinaculum in transmission of forces within the extensor mechanism. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2006;88:2042–2048.

19. Salsich G.B., Ward S.R., Terk M.R., Powers C.M. In vivo assessment of patellofemoral joint contact area in individuals who are pain free. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;417:277–284.

20. Ramappa A.J., Apreleva M., Harrold F.R., Fitzgibbons P.G., Wilson D.R., Gill T.J. The effects of medialization and anteromedialization of the tibial tubercle on patellofemoral mechanics and kinematics. Am J Sports Med. 2006;34:749–756. 

21. Elias J.J., Kilambi S., Goerke D.R., Cosgarea A.J. Improving vastus medialis obliquus function reduces pressure applied to lateral patellofemoral cartilage. J Orthop Res. 2009;27:578–583.

22. Fulkerson J.P., Becker G.J., Meaney J.A., Miranda M., Folcik M.A. Anteromedial tibial tubercle transfer without bone graft. Am J Sports Med. 1990;18:490–497.

23. Saranathan A., Kirkpatrick M.S., Mani S. The effect of tibial tuberosity realignment procedures on the patellofemoral pressure distribution. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc. 2011;20: 2054–2061.