Intralesional meglumine antimoniate for the treatment of localised cutaneous leishmaniasis: a retrospective review of a Brazilian referral centre

Although intralesional meglumine antimoniate (MA) infiltration is considered an option for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) therapy and is widely used in the Old World, there have been few studies supporting this therapeutic approach in the Americas. This study aims to describe outcomes and adverse even...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Rosiana Estéfane da silva, Antonio Toledo Júnior, Maria Camilo Senna, Ana Rabello, Glaucia Fernandes Cota
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2016
País:Brasil
Institución:Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)
Repositorio:Repositório Institucional da UFMG
Idioma:inglés
OAI Identifier:oai:repositorio.ufmg.br:1843/78333
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/1843/78333
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Leishmaniose Cutânea
Terapia
Antimoniato de Meglumina
Descripción
Sumario:Although intralesional meglumine antimoniate (MA) infiltration is considered an option for cutaneous leishmaniasis (CL) therapy and is widely used in the Old World, there have been few studies supporting this therapeutic approach in the Americas. This study aims to describe outcomes and adverse events associated with intralesional therapy for CL. This retrospective study reviewed the experience of a Brazilian leishmaniasis reference centre using intralesional MA to treat 31 patients over five years (2008 and 2013). The median age was 63 years (22-86) and the median duration time of the lesions up to treatment was 16 weeks. In 22 patients (71%), intralesional therapy was indicated due to the presence of contraindications or previous serious adverse events with systemic MA. Other indications were failure of systemic therapy or ease of administration. Intralesional treatment consisted of one-six infiltrations (median three) for a period of up to 12 weeks. The initial (three months) and definitive (six months) cure rates were 70.9% and 67.7%, respectively. Most patients reported mild discomfort during infiltration and no serious adverse events were observed. In conclusion, these results show that the intralesional MA efficacy rate was very similar to that of systemic MA treatment, and reinforce the need for further studies with adequate design to establish the efficacy and safety of this therapeutic approach.