A Case of Snooker Cue Injury
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Penetrating trauma to male external genitalia is rare and furthermore has not been reported in children. We report a case of this rather unusual injury. No mention has been found of this type of injury in the literature CASE REPORT An 11-year old boy presented to Accident Department with a snooker injury to his scrotum sustained by falling off a high chair onto the cue tip. There was no history of any fight or suspicious intent. On arrival, he was alert and fully conscious. No other injury was identified. He was haemodynamically stable and was covered for tetanus. Genital examination revealed a penetrating injury to the left hemi-scrotum through the base with exit point over the supra-pubic region with the snooker cue in situ (Figure I & II). No bleeding from the urethral meatus was identified. Abdominal examination revealed no signs of peritonism. Chest examination was normal. Abdomen and Chest X ray were normal. Figure 1 Figure I: showing the entry and exit point Figure 2 Figure II: showing the snooker cue transversing through the hemiscrotum Intravenous antibiotics were administered. Every attempt was made to keep the boy calm and the cue immobile. The patient was taken to theatre and the wound was explored. Cord and testis were intact and no communication with the abdominal cavity was found. The wound was closed over a corrugated drain. Urethral catherization was performed to exclude any injury. Post-operatvely, intravenous antibiotics were given for 24 hrs and then oral to complete the course. The corrugated drain removed next day. Further followup: No further problems were reported and the wound healed well. DISCUSSION Penetrating injury to the scrotum is uncommon and the A Case of Snooker Cue Injury 2 of 3 nature of this injury is unique. There has been no mention of this type of injury in children in a literature review. Of the 40 patients reported, 36 were gunshot wounds and 4 stab wounds [1] and one isolated case of landing on a broomstick [2]. Usually not serious in itself it may be associated with other more serious conditions. [2] [3]. No attempt should be made to remove the foreign object in the Emergency department. Furthermore, one should be vigilant about associated injuries and the patient should be observed in hospital for a period of time. Early surgical exploration with conservative debridement is recommended [1]. In all cases, the entire tract should be explored to its terminus to search for other injuries [2]. Penetrating injuries have a lower mortality rate, possibly due to a higher index of suspicion and fewer delays in operating [3]. CORRESPONDENCE TO A. K. Singh 2 Forest Rise Desford Leicester United Kingdom LE9 9DX Tel: 01455822490 Fax: 0115 9709921 E-mail: anjanisingh@lineone.net References 1. Cline-K J, Mata-J A, Venable -D D, Eastham-J A. Penetrating trauma to male external genitalia. Journal of Trauma 1998 Mar, 44(3): 492-4 2. Schwarz-R.J, Blair-G.K. Trans-scrotal intra-abdominal injuries. Canadian Journal of surgery 1995 Aug; 38(4): 374-6. 3. Datta-S N, Wheeler-M H. Isolated penetrating injury to the duodenum via a scrotal entry wound. British journal of Surgery 1994 Jun, 81(6): 885. A Case of Snooker Cue Injury 3 of 3 Author Information Anjani Kumar Singh, MBBS MRCS Senior House Officer General Surgery, Department of General Surgery, Diana Princess of Wales hospital Harish Kumar, MS FRCS Specialist Registrar General Surgery, Department of General Surgery, Diana Princess of Wales hospital
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,003 | 0,003 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,007 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,007 | 0,003 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».