Int Health. 2012 Sep;4(3):153-63. doi: 10.1016/j.inhe.2012.06.004.

Local or systemic treatment for New World cutaneous leishmaniasis? Re-evaluating the evidence for the risk of mucosal leishmaniasis.

International health

Johannes Blum, Diana N J Lockwood, Leo Visser, Gundel Harms, Mark S Bailey, Eric Caumes, Jan Clerinx, Pieter P A M van Thiel, Gloria Morizot, Christoph Hatz, Pierre Buffet

PMID: 24029394 DOI: 10.1016/j.inhe.2012.06.004

Abstract

This review addresses the question of whether the risk of developing mucosal leishmaniasis (ML) warrants systemic treatment in all patients with New World cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) or whether local treatment might be an acceptable alternative. The risk of patients with New World CL developing ML after the initial infection has been the main argument for systemic treatment. However, this statement needs re-evaluation and consideration of all the available data. The putative benefit of preventing ML should outweigh the toxicity of systemic antileishmanial therapy. To assess the need for and risk of systemic treatment the following factors were reviewed: the incidence and prevalence of ML in endemic populations and in travellers; the severity of mucosal lesions; the efficacy of current options to treat ML; the toxicity and, to a lesser extent, the costs of systemic treatment; the risk of developing ML after local treatment; and the strengths and limitations of current estimates of the risk of developing ML in different situations. Local treatment might be considered as a valuable treatment option for travellers suffering from New World CL, provided that there are no risk factors for developing ML such as multiple lesions, big lesions (>4 cm(2)), localisation of the lesion on the head or neck, immunosuppression or acquisition of infection in the high Andean countries, notably Bolivia.

Publication Types

• Journal Article