Elsevier

Journal of Infection

Volume 60, Issue 6, June 2010, Pages 431-439
Journal of Infection

Risk stratification and outcome of cellulitis admitted to hospital

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jinf.2010.03.014Get rights and content

Summary

Objectives

To identify risk factors associated with mortality and adverse outcome of community acquired cellulitis/erysipelas requiring hospital admission.

Methods

A retrospective analysis of 395 episodes of cellulitis/erysipelas admitted to a tertiary referral hospital between January 1999 and December 2006.

Results

Mortality was 2.5% (10/395). There were 112 complications (28.4%). Median hospitalisation was 5 days. Factors independently associated with mortality, adverse outcome and prolonged stay (>7 days) were bacteraemia and albumin <30 g/L. A risk stratification model was designed based on factors independently associated with adverse outcome: altered mental status, neutrophilia/paenia, discharge from the cellulitic area, hypoalbuminaemia and history of congestive cardiac failure. Adverse outcome risk among patients with scores <4, 6–9 and >9 was <20%, 55% and 100%, respectively. All patients who died had admission score ≥4. Factors independently associated with prolonged hospitalisation were: age >60, symptom duration >4 days, hypoalbuminaemia, bacteraemia, isolation of MRSA and time to effective antibiotics >8 h. MRSA was more frequent among patients admitted during 2003–2006 (OR 2.43, 95% CI: 1-12-5.27). Streptococci accounted for most bacteraemia (11/20). Infectious Disease physician input was independently associated with shorter hospitalisation.

Conclusions

Cellulitis/erysipelas requiring hospitalisation confers considerable morbidity and mortality. Clinical markers present on admission can be used to stratify patient risk of mortality and adverse outcome.

Introduction

Superficial soft-tissue infections that involve the skin (erysipelas) or spread to the subcutaneous tissue (cellulitis) are characterized by erythema, swelling, pain, and frequently systemic involvement.1 The estimated incidence of cellulitis in developed countries is 16.4–24.6/1000 person-years.2 Although cases are frequently managed as outpatients,3 cellulitis ranks as the 11th most frequent diagnosis in Australian public hospitals with 73.6 patient days per 10,000 population.4 Cellulitis and/or erysipelas are generally not considered severe infections.1 The mortality of cellulitis/erysipelas in the pre-antibiotic era has been estimated to be 11%.5 The all-cause mortality for patients requiring hospital admission for cellulitis today remains considerable, at 5–7.2%.6 Complications occurring in patients hospitalised with cellulitis substantially increase health-care costs.4, 7 Factors predictive of mortality and morbidity are not well defined in the literature and the process of devising relevant treatment guidelines and designing appropriate clinical drug trials, in the era of increasing antimicrobial resistance, are impeded.5

The present study aimed to evaluate factors associated with mortality, complications and prolonged hospital stay in community-acquired cellulitis requiring hospitalisation. Differences in patient management between Infectious Disease (ID) physicians and other hospital specialities were also analysed.

Section snippets

Materials and methods

This retrospective cohort study was conducted in a 650-bed tertiary referral hospital in Sydney, Australia between January 1999 and December 2006. Ethics approval was obtained from the South Eastern Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee. Admissions with International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10-CM) codes L03.0, L03.1, L04, L08, L89, H00.0, K12.2 and J34.0, corresponding to cellulitis and/or erysipelas at the different anatomical sites, were selected by medical record database. Although

Results

During the study period 1241 cellulitis cases were admitted. Of these, 683 (55%) were randomly chosen (alphabetically) for further analysis, due to study duration limitations. Those selected were verified as being representative of the whole dataset in terms of age, sex, admission period and team, and ICD-10 major code (data not shown). Out of the 683 cases, 395 met the inclusion criteria. Of the 288 excluded, cellulitis was not the primary diagnosis in 143, was hospital-acquired in 52, was not

Discussion

We analysed 395 cases of cellulitis admitted to a tertiary referral hospital over an 8-year period, identifying parameters associated with mortality, complications and prolonged hospitalisation. For the purposes of clinical trials, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) categorise skin and skin-structure infections (SSSI) as uncomplicated or complicated if systemic features such as fever, tachycardia, and neutrophilia are present.10 There is limited data on how these systemic features

Author contribution

All authors have made substantial contributions to the key areas highlighted in the author's instructions: 1) the conception and design of the study, or acquisition of data, or analysis and interpretation of data 2) drafting the article or revising it critically for important intellectual content 3) final approval of the version to be submitted.

Conflict of interest/funding

The authors declare there was no external funding received for this work. No conflicts of interest exist for this study.

References (30)

  • A.L. Bisno et al.

    Streptococcal infections of skin and soft tissues

    N Engl J Med

    (1996)
  • M.M. Levy et al.

    2001 SCCM/ESICM/ACCP/ATS/SIS international sepsis definitions conference

    Crit Care Med

    (2003)
  • D.L. Stevens

    Antimicrobial agents for complicated skin and skin-structure infections: noninferiority margins, placebo-controlled trials, and the complexity of clinical trials

    Clin Infect Dis

    (2009)
  • R. Tan et al.

    The design, characteristics and predictors of mortality in the North of England Cellulitis Treatment Assessment (NECTA)

    Int J Clin Pract

    (2007)
  • P. Corwin et al.

    Randomised controlled trial of intravenous antibiotic treatment for cellulitis at home compared with hospital

    BMJ

    (2005)
  • Cited by (0)

    View full text