Interventions for bacterial folliculitis and boils (furuncles and carbuncles)

Exploring the pharmacokinetics of second-generation cephalosporin, cefaclor: a systematic review in healthy and diseased populations

Cefaclor is a bactericidal antibiotic recommended for treating diverse types of infections. This review aims to comprehensively assess the pharmacokinetic (PK) data on cefaclor in humans.Google Scholar, PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EBSCO databases were systematically performed to identify all the relevant studies containing at least one reported PK parameter of cefaclor.Cefaclor shows the linear PK profile as the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to t (AUC0-t) and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) increase in a dose-dependent manner. The AUC0-t of cefaclor in the rice diet was found to be higher than that of bread food, i.e. 19.9 ± 2.6 ug/ml.hr vs 15.4 ± 4 ug/ml.hr. The AUC in paediatrics during the fed state was significantly higher compared to that in adults. Patients with renal impairments showed a Cmax 2.2 times higher than that of normal subjects. A significant increase in Cmax was depicted among individuals following a vegetarian diet in comparison with the non-vegetarian diet. Moreover, cefaclor exhibits time-dependent killing above the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC < 2 ug), favouring its use in treating infections caused by specific pathogens.This systematic review summarises all the reported PK parameters of cefaclor in healthy and diseased subjects in the literature. This data can help practitioners in adjusting cefaclor doses among different diseases and populations to avoid drug interactions and adverse effects.

Attitudes, Beliefs, and Behaviors of Topical Antibiotic Prescribing among Primary Care Providers in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

The World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that 20-50% of antibiotics are misused in society. In addition to the development of antimicrobial resistance, topical antibiotics have been associated with adverse effects such as allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and inadequate wound healing. This study investigated the appropriateness of topical antibiotic prescriptions among primary care providers in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted among Saudi Arabian primary care providers (physicians (general, family, and internal medicine)) employed in governmental and non-governmental healthcare facilities (primary care centers and outpatient clinics).

RESULTS

In total, 222 participants were included in the analysis. A total of 73% agreed that inappropriate topical antibiotic use puts patients at risk, and 43% reported antibiotic resistance in daily practice. Many respondents lacked knowledge of the proper indications for topical antibiotics, and 66.2% attributed this to a lack of updated knowledge, while 45% blamed inadequate supervision.

CONCLUSION

Antibiotic prescription patterns deviated from the standards recommended by WHO. This calls for continuous review at all levels of healthcare, providing more physician education and ensuring that antibiotic therapy guidelines are easily accessible and effectively used to avoid the negative consequences of inappropriate antibiotic prescription.

Turpentine Ointment for the Treatment of Folliculitis: An Open, Prospective, Randomized, Placebo- and Comparator-Controlled Multicenter Trial

INTRODUCTION

Folliculitis is a painful infection and inflammation of the hair follicles, mostly caused by bacterial, fungal, or, more rarely, viral infections. Turpentine derivatives have been used traditionally to treat various skin infections and could thus also be effective in treating folliculitis. We carried out an open, prospective, randomized, placebo- and comparator-controlled multicenter trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of an ointment containing pine turpentine oil, larch turpentine, and eucalyptus oil in the treatment of acute folliculitis.

METHODS

Seventy outpatients with acute folliculitis were treated with the turpentine ointment, a comparator (povidone iodine solution), or a placebo (Vaseline) for 7 days. Photographs of the affected skin areas were taken by the physicians at four visits and by the patients on a daily basis. Photographs were evaluated by blinded observers. Primary efficacy endpoint was the change in total hair follicle lesion counts. Secondary endpoints included the evolution of the lesion counts in the course of the study, responder rate (improvement of follicle lesions by at least one count), and the patient's global assessment. Safety endpoints were the tolerability of the treatments and adverse event recording.

RESULTS

A decrease of follicle lesions counts was detected for both active treatments but not for placebo, but the differences among groups were not statistically significant. As for the secondary endpoints, the ointment showed statistically significant superiority over placebo for the evolution of the lesions during the course of the study (p = 0.017), the responder rate (p = 0.032), and the subjective efficacy assessment by patients (p = 0.029). All treatments were equally well tolerated, with a similar number of treatment-emergent adverse events.

CONCLUSION

The turpentine ointment is an effective and safe option for the treatment of folliculitis.

Current management of generalized pustular psoriasis

Generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) is a rare subset of psoriasis involving episodes of sterile pustules accompanied by inflammation and, often, systemic involvement. The inflammatory nature of GPP has potential for severe multisystem complications including high-output cardiac failure, infections, digestive system issues, and disfiguring or lethal acute flare episodes. The disease tends to have higher prevalence in females and Asians. The IL-1/IL-36 inflammatory pathway is a critical facet of GPP's pathology. Genetic mutations that are associated with GPP include modifications of Interleukin 36 Receptor Antagonist (IL36RN), Caspase Recruitment Domain Family Member 14 (CARD14), Adaptor Related Protein Complex 1 Subunit Sigma 3 (AP1S3), Myeloperoxidase (MPO) and Serpin Peptidase Inhibitor Clade A Member 3 (SERPINA3) genes. Treatment guidelines for GPP are not well-entrenched. Currently, only one GPP-specific treatment, the interleukin-36 receptor antagonist (IL-36Ra) spesolimab, has been approved for use in the United States. Additional anti-IL-36 pathway therapies are currently being developed. Other treatment options include other biologic therapies such as IL-17 inhibitors, IL-23 inhibitors and TNFα inhibitors. Non-biologic therapeutic options include retinoids, cyclosporine and methotrexate. Treatment options differ throughout the world; most countries utilize retinoids, cyclosporine and methotrexate as first-line non-biologic options. China and United Kingdom have no GPP-specific biologic therapies approved for use, while several biologic therapies are approved for use in Japan. This review aims to serve as an update on the current global management of GPP while also including relevant aspects of disease pathogenesis, diagnosis, clinical presentation, histopathology, aetiology and epidemiology.

Interventions for bacterial folliculitis and boils (furuncles and carbuncles)

BACKGROUND

Bacterial folliculitis and boils are globally prevalent bacterial infections involving inflammation of the hair follicle and the perifollicular tissue. Some folliculitis may resolve spontaneously, but others may progress to boils without treatment. Boils, also known as furuncles, involve adjacent tissue and may progress to cellulitis or lymphadenitis. A systematic review of the best evidence on the available treatments was needed.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions (such as topical antibiotics, topical antiseptic agents, systemic antibiotics, phototherapy, and incision and drainage) for people with bacterial folliculitis and boils.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases up to June 2020: the Cochrane Skin Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and Embase. We also searched five trials registers up to June 2020. We checked the reference lists of included studies and relevant reviews for further relevant trials.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed systemic antibiotics; topical antibiotics; topical antiseptics, such as topical benzoyl peroxide; phototherapy; and surgical interventions in participants with bacterial folliculitis or boils. Eligible comparators were active intervention, placebo, or no treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were 'clinical cure' and 'severe adverse events leading to withdrawal of treatment'; secondary outcomes were 'quality of life', 'recurrence of folliculitis or boil following completion of treatment', and 'minor adverse events not leading to withdrawal of treatment'. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 RCTs (1300 participants). The studies included more males (332) than females (221), although not all studies reported these data. Seventeen trials were conducted in hospitals, and one was conducted in clinics. The participants included both children and adults (0 to 99 years). The studies did not describe severity in detail; of the 232 participants with folliculitis, 36% were chronic. At least 61% of participants had furuncles or boils, of which at least 47% were incised. Duration of oral and topical treatments ranged from 3 days to 6 weeks, with duration of follow-up ranging from 3 days to 6 months. The study sites included Asia, Europe, and America. Only three trials reported funding, with two funded by industry. Ten studies were at high risk of 'performance bias', five at high risk of 'reporting bias', and three at high risk of 'detection bias'. We did not identify any RCTs comparing topical antibiotics against topical antiseptics, topical antibiotics against systemic antibiotics, or phototherapy against sham light. Eleven trials compared different oral antibiotics. We are uncertain as to whether cefadroxil compared to flucloxacillin (17/21 versus 18/20, risk ratio (RR) 0.90, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70 to 1.16; 41 participants; 1 study; 10 days of treatment) or azithromycin compared to cefaclor (8/15 versus 10/16, RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.40; 31 participants; 2 studies; 7 days of treatment) differed in clinical cure (both very low-certainty evidence). There may be little to no difference in clinical cure rate between cefdinir and cefalexin after 17 to 24 days (25/32 versus 32/42, RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.38; 74 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence), and there probably is little to no difference in clinical cure rate between cefditoren pivoxil and cefaclor after 7 days (24/46 versus 21/47, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.78; 93 participants; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence). For risk of severe adverse events leading to treatment withdrawal, there may be little to no difference between cefdinir versus cefalexin after 17 to 24 days (1/191 versus 1/200, RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.62; 391 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). There may be an increased risk with cefadroxil compared with flucloxacillin after 10 days (6/327 versus 2/324, RR 2.97, 95% CI 0.60 to 14.62; 651 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence) and cefditoren pivoxil compared with cefaclor after 7 days (2/77 versus 0/73, RR 4.74, 95% CI 0.23 to 97.17; 150 participants; 1 study; low-certainty evidence). However, for these three comparisons the 95% CI is very wide and includes the possibility of both increased and reduced risk of events. We are uncertain whether azithromycin affects the risk of severe adverse events leading to withdrawal of treatment compared to cefaclor (274 participants; 2 studies; very low-certainty evidence) as no events occurred in either group after seven days. For risk of minor adverse events, there is probably little to no difference between the following comparisons: cefadroxil versus flucloxacillin after 10 days (91/327 versus 116/324, RR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.98; 651 participants; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence) or cefditoren pivoxil versus cefaclor after 7 days (8/77 versus 5/73, RR 1.52, 95% CI 0.52 to 4.42; 150 participants; 1 study; moderate-certainty evidence). We are uncertain of the effect of azithromycin versus cefaclor after seven days due to very low-certainty evidence (7/148 versus 4/126, RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.38 to 4.17; 274 participants; 2 studies). The study comparing cefdinir versus cefalexin did not report data for total minor adverse events, but both groups experienced diarrhoea, nausea, and vaginal mycosis during 17 to 24 days of treatment. Additional adverse events reported in the other included studies were vomiting, rashes, and gastrointestinal symptoms such as stomach ache, with some events leading to study withdrawal. Three included studies assessed recurrence following completion of treatment, none of which evaluated our key comparisons, and no studies assessed quality of life.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found no RCTs regarding the efficacy and safety of topical antibiotics versus antiseptics, topical versus systemic antibiotics, or phototherapy versus sham light for treating bacterial folliculitis or boils. Comparative trials have not identified important differences in efficacy or safety outcomes between different oral antibiotics for treating bacterial folliculitis or boils. Most of the included studies assessed participants with skin and soft tissue infection which included many disease types, whilst others focused specifically on folliculitis or boils. Antibiotic sensitivity data for causative organisms were often not reported. Future trials should incorporate culture and sensitivity information and consider comparing topical antibiotic with antiseptic, and topical versus systemic antibiotics or phototherapy.