Abstract
Aim
To examine differences in risk factors, clinical features and outcomes of cellulitis between those 75 + years and those <75 years admitted to a metropolitan hospital.
Methods
A prospective study of patients with limb cellulitis requiring intravenous antibiotics conducted at Bankstown-Lidcombe Hospital, Australia from June 2014 to April 2015.
Results
Thirty one patients were 75 + years and 69 less than 75 years. A greater proportion of older patients resided in nursing home (25.8% vs 2.9% respectively, p = 0.001) and mobilized with walking aid(s) (58.1% vs 11.6% respectively, p < 0.001). Significantly more older patients had documented hypertension (45.2% vs 23.2% respectively p = 0.035), atrial fibrillation (33.5% vs 5.8% respectively, p < 0.001), dementia (22.6% vs 1.4% respectively, p = 0.001) and malignancy (16.1% vs 1.4% respectively, p = 0.010). The clinical presentation of cellulitis and cellulitis severity (Eron classification) did not significantly differ in both groups; however older patients were more likely to have dependent edema (OR 4.0, 95%CI 1.3–12.6, p = 0.018) and less likely to be obese (OR 0.3, 95%CI 0.1–0.8, p = 0.012) or had a past history of cellulitis (OR 0.3, 95%CI 0.1–1.0, p = 0.044) on presentation. Despite the age difference, there were no major differences in intravenous antibiotic choice, hospital length of stay, and hospital readmission rates in both groups. Older patients however, were more likely to experience complications such as falls and/or decreased mobility (38.7% vs 15.9% respectively, p = 0.020) during the cellulitis episode.
Conclusion
There are minor differences in the risk factors and clinical features of cellulitis in older patients as compared to the young. Outcomes are similar except for a higher incidence of hospital related complications.
Keywords: Cellulitis, Older people, Outcomes
Highlights
-
•
To examine the differences in outcomes of cellulitis in hospitalized patients who are 75 + years and those <75 years.
-
•
A prospective study of patients with limb cellulitis requiring intravenous antibiotics conducted at Bankstown Hospital.
-
•
Older people had similar outcomes to younger patients after presenting to hospital with mild to moderate limb cellulitis.
1. Introduction
Cellulitis is a bacterial infection of the skin involving the dermis and subcutaneous fat. In Australia, cellulitis accounts for over 250,000 hospital bed days, or 10.5% of potentially preventable hospitalizations [1].While most episodes of cellulitis can be managed as an outpatient, a significant proportion, particularly older people, require hospitalization. Over a 12-month period from 2014 to 2015, the cellulitis hospitalization rate was 1100 per 100,000 in the 80 plus age group as opposed to 237 episodes per 100,000 in the general population [1].
Cellulitis typically presents with pain, erythema, warmth and edema. Systemic symptoms including fever and tachycardia may be present although thought to be less frequent in older persons [[2], [3], [4], [5], [6]]. Known risk factors for cellulitis are venous edema, lymphedema, skin conditions, traumatic injury, leg ulcers, peripheral vascular disease, fungal infections, past history of cellulitis and obesity [[7], [8], [9], [10]].
Age alone does not alter treatment principles for bacterial cellulitis (including use of antibiotics); however age-related pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, cognitive status and social circumstances [11] may impact on treatment decisions particularly need for hospitalization.
Once hospitalized, age is an independent risk factor for increased length of stay for cellulitis with other factors being long duration of symptoms, tachycardia, hypotension, leukocytosis, hypoalbuminemia, elevated serum creatinine, bacteremia, obesity and diabetes mellitus [[12], [13], [14], [15]].
Age is significantly associated with increased mortality from cellulitis although it is unclear if this is due to illness severity or underlying comorbidity [16]. Other factors associated with mortality are delayed administration of antibiotics, presence of multiple comorbidities, previous myocardial infarction, congestive heart failure, liver disease, hypoalbuminemia, renal insufficiency, morbid obesity, lower limb edema, Pseudomonas aeruginosa infection, bacteremia and septic shock [14,17].
Hospital readmission for cellulitis is also more common in older people [18] particularly if there has been more than one prior episode of cellulitis19.
2. Aims
In this prospective study, we aimed to examine differences in risk factors, clinical features, management, and outcomes of cellulitis between those 75 years or more and those less than 75 years admitted to a large metropolitan hospital.
3. Methods
The study was conducted at Bankstown-Lidcombe Hospital, New South Wales, Australia from June 2014 to April 2015. The study was approved by the South-Western Sydney Local Health District (SWSLHD) Ethics Committee.
Between June 2014 and April 2015, potential patients were identified through review of the Bankstown Hospital inpatient list three times a week by a study investigator. We included all identified patients aged 18 years or more with a diagnosis of cellulitis of the upper and/or lower limb(s) and excluded patients with infected ulcers on presentation, pregnant patients and those with post-operative wound infections.
The patients were then stratified into an older group (aged 75 years or more) and a younger group (74 years or less) and were followed up during their admission and for a total of 28 days post completion of intravenous antibiotics. We studied the over 75 years age group as that this age group is more descriptive of the frail older cohort [19].
Data collected included basic demographics, clinical characteristics, relevant investigations, treatment provided and clinical outcomes. The severity of cellulitis was rated using the Eron classification [20].
Data were analyzed with SPSS Version 24 and R version 3.3.1. Chi-square test was used to compare proportions. Student's T-test was used to compare differences in means for normally distributed variables. For non-normally distributed continuous variables, non-parametric test was used to assess differences in the ranked median scores. Logistic regression was used to assess statistically significant risk factors for cellulitis in the older and younger age groups. Statistically significant results were set at an alpha level of 0.05. The study is in line with the STROCSS guidelines [21]. The study also been registered on the research registry UIN:researchregistry5125.
4. Results
One hundred and thirteen patients were identified during the study period and 100 patients (88.5%) consented to participate. Thirty-one (31.0%) patients were aged 75 years and older and 69 (69.0%) patients were 74 years or less.
The mean age was 84.4 ± 5.8 years in the older group and 53.4 ± 14.2 years in the younger group. The older patients had lower BMI than their younger counterparts [28.3 (±8.0) vs 36.0 (±12.3) respectively, p < 0.001]. A higher proportion resided in residential aged care facilities (25.8% vs 2.9% respectively, p = 0.001); and mobilized with walking aid(s) (58.1% vs 11.6% respectively, p < 0.001). (Table 1).
Table 1.
Patient characteristics.
| Age <75 years (N = 69) | Age 75 + years (N = 31) | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age mean(SD) | 53.4 (±14.2) | 84.4 (±5.8) | <0.001 |
| Female n (%) | 23 (33.3%) | 16 (48.5%) | 0.12 |
| BMI | 36.0 (±12.3) | 28.3 (±8.0) | <0.001 |
| Residential Aged Care Facility | 2 (2.9%) | 8 (25.8%) | 0.001 |
| Mobility | <0.001 | ||
| Mobile unaided | 61 (88.4%) | 13 41.9%) | |
| Mobile with aid | 8 (11.6%) | 18 (58.1%) | |
| Risk factorsa OR (95% CI) | |||
| Dependent edema | – | 4.0 (1.3–12.6) | 0.018 |
| Obesity (BMI>30) | – | 0.3 (0.1–0.8) | 0.012 |
| Previous cellulitis | – | 0.3 (0.1–1.0) | 0.044 |
| Peripheral vascular disease | – | 3.1 (0.9–10.6) | 0.079 |
| Tinea pedis | – | 0.9 (0.2–4.1) | 0.930 |
| Venous dermatitis | – | 0.5 (0.1–2.0) | 0.302 |
| Comorbidities | |||
| Hypertension | 16 (23.2%) | 14 (45.2%) | 0.035 |
| AF | 4 (5.8%) | 11 (33.5%) | <0.001 |
| Dementia | 1 (1.4%) | 7 (22.6%) | 0.001 |
| Malignancy | 1 (1.4%) | 5 (16.1%) | 0.010 |
| Diabetes | 23 (31.9%) | 6 (19.4%) | 0.24 |
| IHD | 11 (15.9%) | 10 (32.3%) | 0.11 |
| CCF | 10 (14.5%) | 9 (29.0%) | 0.10 |
| DVT | 3 (4.3%) | 5 (16.1%) | 0.10 |
| PE | 2 (2.9%) | 5 (16.1%) | 0.072 |
| Steroid use last 3 months | 3 (4.3%) | 3 (9.7%) | 0.37 |
Logistic regression – Chi-square = 17.868, p = 0.007, df = 6, Nagelkerke's R2 0.230; BMI body mass index; IHD ischaemic heart disease; AF atrial fribrillation; CCF congestive cardiac failure; DVT deep vein thrombosis; PE pulmonary embolism.
A significantly higher proportion of older patients had documented hypertension (45.2% vs 23.2% respectively p = 0.035), atrial fibrillation (33.5% vs 5.8% respectively, p < 0.001), dementia (22.6% vs 1.4% respectively, p = 0.001) and malignancy (16.1% vs 1.4% respectively, p = 0.010). (Table 1).
In terms of cellulitis risk factors, after controlling for potential confounders, older patients were more likely to have dependent edema (OR 4.0 95%CI 1.3–12.6, p = 0.018); but less likely to be obese (OR 0.3, 95%CI 0.1–1.0, p = 0.012) or had a prior history of cellulitis (OR 0.3, 95%CI 0.1–1.0, p = 0.044) than younger patients. The risk of peripheral vascular disease, tinea pedis and cutaneous dermatitis were similar in both groups.
Cellulitis presenting features such as pain, fever, chills and vital signs (temperature, heart rate and blood pressure) did not significantly differ between the two groups. The severity of cellulitis, as defined by the Eron classification [22] also did not differ between groups with the majority of patients having Eron Classes I and II (Table 2).
Table 2.
Clinical characteristics.
| Age <75 years (N = 69) | Age 75 + years (N = 31) | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Duration of symptoms median (IQR) | 3.0 (2.0–6.0) | 4.0 (2.0–14.0) | 0.23 |
| Fever and chills | 19 (27.5%) | 6 (19.4%) | 0.46 |
| Heart rate | 92 (±17) | 89 (±15) | 0.384 |
| BP – Systolic | 136 (±18) | 143 (±24) | 0.158 |
| BP _Diastolic | 75 (±12) | 72 (±11) | 0.227 |
| Temperature | 37.4 (±1.0) | 37.3 (±1.0) | 0.796 |
| Pain score | 0.055 | ||
| Mild 0-3 | 32 (51.6%) | 14 (53.8%) | |
| Moderate 4-7 | 20 (32.3%) | 12 (46.2%) | |
| Severe 8-10 | 10 (16.1%) | 0 | |
| Pathology | |||
| Haemoglobin | 135.0 (±19.4) | 122.1 (±16.4) | 0.002 |
| White cell count | 11.3 (±5.1) | 11.1 (±6.0) | 0.61 |
| Albumin | 41.4 (±4.1) | 38.0 (±4.7) | 0.001 |
| Creatinine – median (IQR) | 88 (76–106) | 93 (71–131) | 0.692 |
| Urea – median (IQR) | 5.8 (4.8–8.4) | 7.9 (5.8–12.4) | 0.011 |
| CRP – median (IQR) | 33 (15–117) | 60 (9–133) | 0.919 |
| Blood culture | 29 (42.0%) | 18 (58.1%) | 0.071 |
| Eron Classification | 0.415 | ||
| Class I | 10 (14.5%) | 2 (6.5%) | |
| Class II | 55 (79.7%) | 26 (83.9%) | |
| Class III | 4 (5.8%) | 3 (9.7%) | |
| Class IV | 0 | 0 | |
BP blood pressure; CRP C reactive protein.
Initial laboratory results revealed that older patients had lower hemoglobin [122.1 (±16.4) vs 135.0 (±19.4), p = 0.002] and albumin [38.0 (±47) vs 41.4 (±4.1), p < 0.001] and higher urea level [7.9 (5.8–12.4) vs 5.8 (4.8–8.4), p = 0.011] compared to their younger counterparts. CRP white cell count (WCC) and positive rate of blood culture did not differ between the two groups (Table 2).
Older inpatients presenting with cellulitis were less likely to be referred to hospital in the home (HITH) antibiotic programs for completion of the course of intravenous antibiotics 32.3% vs 59.4% respectively, p = 0.012) compared to younger patients. The antibiotic choices did not differ between the two populations, these included Cephazolin, Flucloxacillin or Tazobactam-Piperacillin.
Older patients with cellulitis were more likely to experience falls or decreased mobility (38.7% vs 15.9% respectively, p = 0.020) compared to the younger group. (Table 3). Despite this, they had similar LOS to their younger counterparts [10 (7–15) vs 8 (6–13) respectively, p = 0.403]. There was one death in each group and the rates of ICU admission, surgical intervention and 28-day readmission were similar in the two groups.
Table 3.
Treatment, complications and outcomes.
| Characteristics | Age <75 years (N = 69) | Age 75 + years (N = 31) | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|
| Completed treatment via HiTH | 41 (59.4%) | 10 (32.3%) | 0.012 |
| Duration of IV antibiotic – median (IQR) | 6 (4–8) | 4 (2–9) | 0.059 |
| Length of hospital stay – median (IQR) | 8 (6–13) | 10 (7–15) | 0.403 |
| Antibiotics | 0.121 | ||
| Cephazolin | 47 (51.1%) | 16 (32.7%) | |
| Flucloxacillin | 20 (21.7%) | 12 (24.5%) | |
| Tazobactam-piperacillin | 7 (7.6%) | 4 (8.2%) | |
| Complications | |||
| DVT | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| PE | 0 | 1 (3%) | 0.31 |
| Fall or decreased mobility | 11 (15.9%) | 12 (38.7%) | 0.020 |
| Nosocomial infection | 1 (1.4%) | 3 (9.7%) | 0.087 |
| Delirium | 1 (1.4%) | 2 (6.5%) | 0.23 |
| Outcomes | |||
| Death | 1 (1.4%) | 1 (3.0%) | 0.531 |
| Needing surgical intervention | 3 (4.3%) | 2 (6.5%) | 0.644 |
| ICU admission | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Readmission within 28 days | 4 (5.8%) | 0 | 0.308 |
| Duration of IV antibiotic – median (IQR) | 6 (4–8) | 4 (2–9) | 0.059 |
| Length of hospital stay – median (IQR) | 8 (6–13) | 10 (7–15) | 0.403 |
| Antibiotics | 0.121 | ||
| Cephazolin | 47 (51.1%) | 16 (32.7%) | |
| Flucloxacillin | 20 (21.7%) | 12 (24.5%) | |
HiTH hospital in the home; DVT deep vein thrombosis; PE pulmonary embolism.
5. Discussion
In this study, we found that older people, despite being frailer than their younger counterparts, had similar treatment outcomes after presenting to hospital with mild to moderate limb cellulitis.
In our study, most of the potential risk factors for cellulitis were similar in the older and younger age groups; however, older patients were more likely to have dependent edema and impaired mobility, and less likely to be obese. Other conditions noted to be more common in the older group were congestive cardiac failure, atrial fibrillation, dementia and malignancy. We believe this finding reflected the higher prevalence of these conditions in the older population rather than an association with cellulitis.
Over 25% of older patients with cellulitis lived in residential aged care facilities. This finding raised the opportunity for the provision of ambulatory care antibiotic programs in aged care homes potentially avoiding the need for hospitalization for residents with cellulitis.
There were no significant differences in the clinical presentation of cellulitis between the two age groups (i.e., duration of cellulitis symptoms, heart rate, blood pressure, temperature, white cell count, CRP and Eron severity classification). Atypical and blunted physiological response to infection with age has been documented in the literature [23]. In severe sepsis, a reduced physiological response can lead to rapid progression of sepsis [2,3,22].Our results did not support a blunted response to infection in older patients with cellulitis. We, however, did not have any patients with severe sepsis to examine the inflammatory response in more detail.
In our study, older patients experienced more falls and impaired mobility during the admission for cellulitis compared to younger patients. While these factors might have made their hospital discharge planning more complex, they did not translate into an increased hospital length of stay. Previously described risk factors affecting LOS in cellulitis (comprising of age, hypoalbuminemia, bacteremia, obesity, diabetes mellitus, tachycardia, hypotension, leukocytosis, and elevated serum creatinine) [7,[12], [13], [14], [15]], tended to be skewed towards age and hypoalbuminemia for the older group and obesity for the younger group in our study.
There were no statistically significant differences between the two groups in terms of mortality, ICU admission, and surgical intervention for cellulitis complications. The majority of patients in both groups had Eron Class I or II cellulitis and did not sustain physiological decompensations; however, in more severe cases of cellulitis, one would expect ageing physiology to sustain more physiological decompensations which may then influence the above parameters.
A lower proportion of older inpatients discharged to HITH programs might have been attributable to their medical comorbidities and functional criteria not meeting HITH requirements. As such, additional health resources may allow HITH programs to manage these complex patients but this would require further study.
Unlike previous published literature [18], we did not find a significant difference in the 28-day readmission rate between the two age cohorts in our study. As the readmission rate was less than 5%, a study with greater number of patients would have more power to detect small differences in readmission rates.
One of the limitations of this study is the small sample size due to a short recruitment period; further study with a larger sample size would assist in validation of our findings. We decided to focus on inpatient cellulitis treatment; however a cellulitis management journey from hospital to community settings would have provided with a more complete picture.
As the number of older patients presenting with cellulitis increases as the population ages, it is important to note that for mild to moderate cellulitis, older patients perform just as well as younger patients with standard cellulitis treatments on clinical and care indicators.
We wish to confirm that there are no known conflicts of interest associated with this publication and there has been no financial or person support for this work with any other people or organizations.
Ethical approval
Ethics approval was taken from South-Western Sydney Local Health District (SWSLHD) Ethics Committee.
Sources of funding
No funding was obtained for the research.
Author contribution
Bin Soo Ong – Supervisor, study concept.
Manoj Kumar – Writing the paper.
Huong Van Nguyen – writing the paper.
Clarence Yeong – Data collection.
Vincent Ngian – data analysis, study concept.
Caitlin Keighley – study concept, data collection.
Research registration number
1. Name of the registry: Research Registry.
2. Unique Identifying number or registration ID: researchregistry5125.
3. Hyperlink to the registration (must be publicly accessible): https://www.researchregistry.com/browse-the-registry#home/registrationdetails/5d7a4d440ba5620010271dc1/
Guarantor
Dr Manoj Kumar.
Consent
All authors have consented to publication.
Provenance and peer review
Not commissioned, externally peer reviewed.
Declaration of competing interest
No conflict of interest from any of the authors.
References
- 1.National Health Performance Authority Analysis of Admitted Patients Care National Minimal Data Set 2013-2014 and Australian Bureau of Statistics Estimated Resident Population 30 June 2013.
- 2.Anderson D.J., Kaye K.S. Skin and soft tissue infections in older adults. Clin. Geriatr. Med. 2007;23(3):595–613. doi: 10.1016/j.cger.2007.03.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Laube S. Skin infections and ageing (2004. Ageing Res. Rev. 2004;3(1):69–89. doi: 10.1016/j.arr.2003.08.003. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Weng Q.Y., Raff A.B., Cohen J.M., Gunasekera N., Okhovat J.P., Vedak P. Costs and consequences associated with misdiagnosed lower extremity cellulitis. JAMA Dermatol. 2017;153(2):141–146. doi: 10.1001/jamadermatol.2016.3816. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.Gunderson C.G., Martinello R.A. A systematic review of bacteremias in cellulitis and erysipelas. J. Infect. 2012;64(2):148–155. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2011.11.004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Esposito S., Noviello S., Leone S. Epidemiology and microbiology of skin and soft tissue infections. Curr. Opin. Infect. Dis. 2016;29(2):109–115. doi: 10.1097/QCO.0000000000000239. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.Dupuy A., Benchikhi H., Roujeau J.C., Bernard P., Vaillant L., Chosidow O. Risk factors for erysipelas of the leg (cellulitis): case-control study. BMJ. 1999;318(7198):1591–1594. doi: 10.1136/bmj.318.7198.1591. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Björnsdóttir S., Gottfredsson M., Thórisdóttir A.S., Gunnarsson G.B., Ríkardsdóttir H., Hilmarsdóttir I. Risk factors for acute cellulitis of the lower limb: a prospective case–control study. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2005;41(10):1416–1422. doi: 10.1086/497127. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.Karppelin M., Siljander T., Vuopio-Varkila J., Kere J., Huhtala H., Vuento R. Factors predisposing to acute and recurrent bacterial non-necrotizing cellulitis in hospitalized patients: a prospective case–control study. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. 2010;16(6):729–734. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-0691.2009.02906.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Halpern J., Holder R., Langford N.J. Ethnicity and other risk factors for acute lower limb cellulitis: a U.K.-based prospective case–control study. Br. J. Dermatol. 2008;158(6):1288–1292. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2008.08489.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 11.Kish T.D., Chang M.H., Fung H.B. Treatment of skin and soft tissue infections in the elderly: a review. Am. J. Geriatr. Pharmacother. 2010;8(6):485–513. doi: 10.1016/S1543-5946(10)80002-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Garg A., Lavian J., Lin G., Sison C., Oppenheim M., Koo B. Clinical characteristics associated with days to discharge among patients admitted with a primary diagnosis of lower limb cellulitis. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol. 2017;76(4):626–631. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2016.11.063. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Morpeth S.C., Chambers S.T., Gallagher K., Frampton C., Pithie A.D. Lower limb cellulitis: features associated with length of hospital stay. J. Infect. 2006;52(1):23–29. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2005.02.017. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 14.Figtree M., Konecny P., Jennings Z., Goh C., Krilis S.A., Miyakis S. Risk stratification and outcome of cellulitis admitted to hospital. J. Infect. 2010;60(6):431–439. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2010.03.014. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.Theofiles M., Maxson J., Herges L., Marcelin A., Angstman K.B. Cellulitis in obesity: adverse outcomes affected by increases in body mass index. J. Prim. Care Community Health. 2015;6(4):233–238. doi: 10.1177/2150131915583659. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.Tan R., Newberry D.J., Arts G.J., Onwuamaegbu M.E. The design, characteristics and predictors of mortality in the North of England cellulitis treatment assessment (NECTA) Int. J. Clin. Pract. 2007;61(11):1889–1893. doi: 10.1111/j.1742-1241.2007.01422..x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Carratalà J., Rosón B., Fernández-Sabé N., Shaw E., del Rio O., Rivera A. Factors associated with complications and mortality in adult patients hospitalized for infectious cellulitis. Eur. J. Clin. Microbiol. Infect. Dis. 2003;22(3):151–157. doi: 10.1007/s10096-003-0902-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Garg A., Lavian J., Lin G., Sison C., Oppenheim M., Koo B. Clinical factors associated with readmission among patients with lower limb cellulitis. Dermatology. 2017;233(1):58–63. doi: 10.1159/000471762. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 19.Ouchi Y., Rakugi H., Arai H., Akishita M., Ito H., Toba K., Kai I. Joint committee of Japan gerontological society (JGLS) and Japan geriatrics society (JGS) on the definition and classification of the elderly, Redefining the elderly as aged 75 years and older: Proposal from the joint Committee of Japan gerontological Society and the Japan geriatrics society. Geriatr. Gerontol. Int. 2017 Jul;17(7):1045–1047. doi: 10.1111/ggi.13118. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.Karppelin M., Siljander T., Aittoniemi J., Hurme M., Huttunen R., Huhtala H. Predictors of recurrent cellulitis in five years. Clinical risk factors and the role of PTX3 and CRP. J. Infect. 2015;70(5):467–473. doi: 10.1016/j.jinf.2014.11.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.Agha R.A., Borrelli M.R., Vella-Baldacchino M., Thavayogan R., Orgill D.P., for the STROCCS Group The STROCCS statement: strengthening the reporting of cohort studies in Surgery. Int. J. Surg. 2017;46:198–202. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.08.586. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 22.Eron L.J. Infections of skin and soft tissues: outcome of a classification scheme. Clin. Infect. Dis. 2000;31(A432):287. [Google Scholar]
- 23.Norman D.C., Grahn D., Yoshikawa T.T. Fever and aging. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 1985;33:859. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.1985.tb05441.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]