Indicators of nonspecific resistance of the organism in patients with destructive forms of erysipelas

Keywords: destructive forms of erysipelas, nonspecific factors of resistance of an organism

Abstract

Purpose of the study. to evaluate the indicators of nonspecific resistance of the organism in patients with destructive forms of erysipelas.

 Materials and methods. 114 case histories of patients who were hospitalized in the center of purulent - septic surgery of KNP "City Hospital G3" in Zaporozhye for the period 2019-2020 were analyzed.

According to the forms of the disease, patients were distributed as follows: erythematous - 24 (21.0%) - control group; bullous - 28 (24.6%), phlegmonous form - 48 (42.1%), necrotic - 14 (12.3%). Among the latter, 10 patients were aggravated by sepsis. 6 patients died, mortality was 60%.

Results. Complementary activity of blood serum in patients with destructive forms of erysipelas in a favorable course of the disease is significantly increased, which is not observed in patients with sepsis. A significant increase in the HCT- test provides information on the degree of functional irritation of peripheral blood neutrophils under the influence of pathogens. But its increase almost 2 times until the moment of clinical recovery indicates the ongoing stimulation of phagocytic cells of peripheral blood, which caused changes in the metabolic profile of cast iron. The decrease in phagocytic activity in patients with sepsis may be due to a defect in the absorption capacity of polymorphonuclear leukocytes, and its progressive decrease, to some extent, may be a marker of adverse disease outcome.

Conclusion. The degree of changes in the indicators of nonspecific resistance of the organism makes it possible to assess the reserves of the immune response, to determine the intensity and dynamics of destructive forms of erysipelas.

References

Brazhnik E, Ostroushko A. Rozhistoe vospalenie v khirurgicheskoj praktike. Nauchnoe obozrenie. Mediczinskie nauki. 2016; 4:14-17. [In Russian ].

Gopatsa G, Yermakova L. Erysipelas: current state of the problem. Nauchnyy al'manakh.2016; 1-2 : 364-341. [In Russian].

Ratnikova L. Et al. Comorbidity of erysipelas and endocrine diseases.Nauchnyyal'manakh. 2016; 3: 341-6. doi:10.17117/na.2016.05.03.341.

Chernushenko E, Kogosova L, Goncharova S et al. Metodicheskie rekomendaczii. Unificzirovanny`e immunologicheskie metody` obsledovaniya bol`ny`kh na staczionarnomi ambulatornom e`tapakh lecheniya. Kiev : MZ USSR.1988;22. doi: https://doi.org/10.22141/1997-2938.1-2.28-29.2015.80859.

Bashkina О, Samotrueva М, Azhikova А, Pakhnova L Nejroimmunnoe`ndokrinnaya regulyacziya fiziologicheskikh i patofiziologicheskikh proczessov v kozhe. Mediczinskaya immunologiya. 2019;21:807-820.https://doi.org/10.15789/1563-0625-2019-5-807-820.

Seymour C, LiuV, Iwashyna T et al. Assessment of Clinical Criteria for Sepsis: For the Third International Consensus Definitions for Sepsis and Septic Shock (Sepsis-3). JAMA. 2016; 23(8): 762-774. doi : 10.1001/jama.2016.0288.

Rhodes A, Evans L, Alhazzani W et al. Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock. Intensive Care Med. 2017; 43(3): 304-377. doi: 10.1007/s00134-017-4683-6. Epub 2017 Jan 18.

Published
2022-06-10
How to Cite
Vasylevskaya, L. (2022). Indicators of nonspecific resistance of the organism in patients with destructive forms of erysipelas. Modern Medical Technology, (2(53), 26-29. https://doi.org/10.34287/MMT.2(53).2022.5
Section
Original research