Active clinical trials for "Abscess"

Pilonidal disease refers to a common disease affecting mostly young males. It may present as asymptomatic pits, acute and painful abscess formation, or chronic discharging sinuses. There are many treatment options for the latter two manifestations but broadly speaking the surgical treatment of acute pilonidal abscess can fall into three categories: (1) incision and drainage, (2) de-roofing and curettage and (3) wide local excision. The evidence available for the surgical management of acute pilonidal abscess is limited. Previous studies have consistently demonstrated that incision and drainage results in high recurrence rates and should not be considered as the first-line treatment option for the management of acute pilonidal abscess. However, it is not clear whether abscess de-roofing with curettage or wide local excision should be considered as the surgical procedure of choice in acute pilonidal abscess. There has not been a prospective randomised study comparing abscess de-roofing with curettage and wide local excision for acute pilonidal abscess. The ideal surgical procedure would be one that results in the lowest rate of abscess recurrence, treats the underlying pilonidal sinus thereby reducing the need for re-operation but has acceptable post-operative pain, complications and time to complete wound healing.

Peritonsillar abscess (PTA) has a relatively high incidence of 41 per 100,000/year in Denmark. In spite of that, there is no regional or national consensus on treatment of PTA. Abscess drainage can be done by aspiration, incision or acute tonsillectomy. Several studies show that incision and aspiration are equally successful. The aim for this study is to compare aspiration to acute tonsillectomy (tonsillectomy a chaud) in a RCT study regarding sick-leave days, days of admission, pain, consumption of antibiotics, consumption of painkillers and patients´ self-assessed quality of life.

Incision and drainage (I&D) is the standard guideline treatment of uncomplicated skin abscesses (a boil or bumo beneath the skin). Ultrasound-guided needle aspiration (USGNA) is a minimally invasive and less painful alternative treatment, but has not been validated as non-inferior to I&D. Multiple studies have shown successful treatment with USGNA of breast, face, neck, and/or trunk abscesses in combination with oral antibiotics with success rates as high as 97%. In 2011 Gaspari et al. published a landmark article on the use of USGNA for skin abscesses. In this randomized controlled trial, USGNA and I&D had failure rates of 74% and 20% respectively, which makes USGNA an unappealing treatment option. However, the study had several methodological issues that likely biased the results in favor of I&D, including the following: 1) aspiration was performed with an 18-gauge needle which is often too small to aspirate thick purulence (or pus); 2) failure to fully aspirate all abscess contents was a priori defined as treatment failure rather than strictly clinical outcomes; 3) the abscess aspiration procedure was not standardized; and 4) post-intervention oral antibiotic therapy was not used on all patients. The main hypothesis is that a modified protocol of the Gaspari et al. USGNA study to address these flaws will demonstrate a failure of USGNA comparable to I&D for the treatment of uncomplicated skin abscesses. First, the study will standardize the use of larger 14-gauge needle on all USGNAs. Second, USGNA intervention failure need not be defined as the inability to completely aspirate all abscess cavity contents under ultrasound guidance. Previous studies have demonstrated clinical success with USGNA of skin abscesses without applying the rigid failure criteria chosen by Gaspari et al. There is only one study in the literature to suggest that there is no correlation between a small quantity of residual abscess contents post-USGNA and ultimate clinical failure, however, there are no studies which specifically address this clinical question. In this study, initial treatment failure of USGNA will be defined as the inability to aspirate any purulent material. Third, treatment outcomes in this study will be determined by clinical resolution of abscess at the study endpoint of 7-10 days, which is a well-established timeline for anticipated abscess healing and endpoint clinical follow-up. Fourth, ultrasound fellowship-trained emergency physicians will perform USGNA in standardized fashion on all enrolled patients. Lastly, post-intervention oral antibiotic with methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) coverage will be provided and compliance closely monitored throughout the study.

Objectives: This study aims to characterize severe skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) in the emergency department through the acquisition of ultrasound images. A wide range of SSTIs will be imaged and recorded, leading to a registry of these infections. The registry will show whether ED (emergency department) sonographers can accurately characterize these infections, as compared to the final hospital diagnosis. The registry will also provide data for a case-control study comparing ultrasonographic characteristics of necrotizing skin and soft tissue infections (NSTIs) to those of non-necrotizing SSTIs. Research procedures: In this study, the investigators will approach patients who present to the Emergency Department with a possible skin and/or tissue infection. Study subjects must be ED patients requiring admission to the hospital for the primary problem of an SSTI due to the need for follow-up. If the patient consents to participating in the study, the investigator will obtain and record an ultrasound image of the infected area. An ultrasound image of an uninfected area of skin will also be recorded for comparison. Patient information regarding personal history, physical examination, blood tests and x-rays will also be gathered from participants.

In this study, the investigators are trying to find out if washing out the abscess (pocket of pus) with fluid will help, instead of only taking out the pus. Your care will be the same as usual, except that you will be selected randomly to have your abscess washed out with fluid, or not.

This study evaluates the intraabdominal abscess rate after laparoscopic appendectomy in complicated acute appendicitis performing irrigation of the abdominal cavity or only suction without lavage.

In this study, the investigators will enroll patients who present to the emergency department with abscesses to the study. The patients will be randomly selected to either have the standard of care, which includes the standard drainage of the abscess and then usually a follow-up visit to recheck the wound, or to have the standard of care plus instructions to use a topical scrub of a soap called chlorhexidine once a day for five days and twice daily application of a topical antibiotic ointment called mupirocin to the nasal passages for five days. The investigators will then call back the patients at 7 days, 14 days (if in the treatment arm), 3 months and 6 months, to ask if they have had any recurrence of abscess formation. The study hypothesis is that the patients who have undergone the decontamination protocol will have fewer subsequent infections.

The purpose of this study is to find if adding oral pain relievers as DYPIRON and TRAMADOL in addition to the local anesthesia injection, can help reducing the pain intensity in patients who diagnosed as Suffering from peritonsillar abscess (PTA)and treated by incision and drainage .

Oxygen has inherent bactericidal properties. The investigators are testing to see if they can reduce the incidence of postoperative abscesses following laparoscopic appendectomy by insufflating with oxygen at the end of the case.

C-reactive protein levels of patients with acute apical abscess are evaluated before and after root canal treatment