Should the chronic form of tularemia be defined? Should the treatment of the chronic form be managed differently?
Abstract
Background: Tularemia is a bacterial, zoonotic disease caused by Francisella tularensis. Although the ulceroglandular form is the most common form in the world, oropharyngeal tularemia is the most common form in Turkey. Lymph node suppuration is the most common complication. F. tularensis causes granulomatous and suppurative lesions in the lymph nodes and other organs.
Methods: Seventeen suspected oropharyngeal form tularemia cases complicated with suppurated lymphadenitis have been examined in this study. All of the patients (17, 100%) had cervical lymphadenopathies and had a history of beta-lactam antibiotic use with the diagnosis of tonsillitis. Tularemia cases were diagnosed according to the case definition of World Health Organization (WHO).
Results: All of the patients (17, 100%) had cervical lymphadenopathies ranging in size from 2-8 cm and unilateral lymphadenopathy, while 12 (71%) patients had right-sided lymphadenopathy. The rate of fever was 41% and the rate of pharyngitis or tonsillitis was 52% at presentation. All patients had a history of beta-lactam antibiotic use with the diagnosis of tonsillitis. Seven patients recovered with first-line monotherapy. In the remaining 10 patients, treatment was rearranged, and these patients were switched to combination treatment or another anti-infective. Surgical drainage was performed on all but two of the patients.
Conclusions: The diagnosis of tularemia is often delayed. It may take a
significant length of time to diagnose the condition and the disease may become
complicated. As it is understood
from our study and other studies, the types and duration of treatment can vary
and differences can be observed in cases that are past the acute stage.
Although the guideline has included a classical treatment approach for the
tularemia, there is no standard approach to cases with delayed diagnosis,
complicated cases and those refractory to conventional regimens. These
observations and other examinations have raised the question whether the
chronic form of tularemia should be defined, and whether the treatment options
and durations should be re-standardized according to the ‘chronic tularemia’
definition as a ‘chronic granulomatous disease’
Keywords
References
- 1. Petersen JM, Mead PS, Schriefer ME. Francisella tularensis: an arthropod-borne pathogen. Vet Res. 2009;40(2):07.
- 2. Ellis J, Oyston PC, Green M, Titball RW. Tularemia. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2002; 15(4): 631-46.
- 3. Berger S. Tularemia: Global Status: 2017 edition. Global Infectious Disease and Epidemiology Network (GIDEON). http://www.gideononline.com.
- 4. Sjöstedt A. Tularemia: history, epidemiology, pathogen physiology, and clinical manifestations. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2007;1105:1-29.
- 5. Maurin M. New anti-infective strategies for treatment of tularemia. Front Cell Infect Microbiol. 2014; 4: 115.
- 6. Penn RL. Francisella tularensis (Tularemia) In: Mandell GL, Bennett JE, Dolin R, editors. Mandell, Douglas and Bennett's principles and practice of infectious diseases. 4th ed. New York: Churchill Ligingstone; 1995. 2060–2068.
- 7. Kilic S, Yesilyurt M. Tularemi: Güncel Tedavi Seçeneklerine Genel Bir Bakış Tularemia: A General Overview on Current Treatment Options. Klimik Dergisi 2011;24(1): 2-10.
- 8. Tärnvik A, Berglund L. Tularemia. Eur Respir J. 2003; 21(2): 361-73.
Details
Primary Language
English
Subjects
Health Care Administration
Journal Section
Research Article
Authors
Yesim Alpay
*
This is me
Türkiye
Publication Date
March 31, 2018
Submission Date
March 22, 2018
Acceptance Date
March 27, 2018
Published in Issue
Year 2018 Volume: 5 Number: 3