Variability in Management of Patients With SJS/TEN: A Survey of Burn Unit Directors

An individual patient data meta-analysis of wound care in patients with toxic epidermal necrolysis

Toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) involves extensive mucocutaneous loss, and care is supportive. The approach to wound care includes surgical debridement or using dressings while leaving the epidermis intact. Robust evidence for either approach is lacking. We compared surgical debridement to the use of dressings while leaving the epidermis in situ (referred to hereon as dressings) in adult patients with TEN. The primary outcome assessed was mortality. The secondary outcome was time to re-epithelialisation. The impact of medications was evaluated. An individual patient data (IPD) systematic review and meta-analysis was undertaken. A random effects meta-analysis and survival analysis for IPD data examined mortality, re-epithelisation time and the effect of systemic medications. The quality of evidence was rated per the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). PROSPERO: CRD42021266611 Fifty-four studies involving 227 patients were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis, with a GRADE from very low to moderate. There was no difference in survival in patients who had surgical debridement or dressings (univariate: p = 0.91, multivariate: p = 0.31). Patients who received dressings re-epithelialised faster than patients who underwent debridement (multivariate HR: 1.96 [1.09-3.51], p = 0.023). Intravenous immunoglobulin (univariate HR: 0.21 [0.09-0.45], p < 0.001; multivariate HR: 0.22 [0.09-0.53], p < 0.001) and cyclosporin significantly reduced mortality (univariate HR: 0.09 [0.01-0.96], p = 0.046; multivariate HR: 0.06 [0.01-0.73], p = 0.028) irrespective of the wound care. This study supports the expert consensus of the dermatology hospitalists, that wound care in patients with TEN should be supportive with the epidermis left intact and supported with dressings, which leads to faster re-epithelialisation.

Does A History of Malignancy Lead to Worse Outcomes in a Single-center Burn Unit?

A history of malignancy is associated with worse outcomes in cardiac disease and trauma. Our objective was to determine if a past medical history or comorbid condition of cancer portends an increased morbidity or mortality in burns or skin-sloughing disorders at our institution. Patients were identified using our Institutional Burn Center registry and linked to the clinical and administrative data. All patients admitted between January 1, 2014 and June 30, 2021 were eligible for inclusion. Demographics, length of stay, comorbid conditions and mortality were evaluated. Statistical analysis was performed with Kruskal-Wallis, chi-square, and Fisher's exact tests. Seven thousand three hundred seventy-two patients were admitted during this time period. Three hundred eighty-six patients had a history of cancer (5%). Patients with a history of cancer were older (56 vs 44 years, P < .0001). They had a significantly longer length of stay (16 vs 10 days, P < .0001). They also had larger burns and higher hospital costs ($147,021 versus $83,788, P < .0001), were more likely to be male and more likely to have a skin-sloughing disorder. A history of cancer was not associated with increased odds of burn mortality. Thus, a history of cancer is associated with increased lengths of stay and costs in patients admitted for burn injury or skin-sloughing disorders, but not associated with increased mortality. Further study is warranted to investigate and mitigate what aspects of their care could be adjusted to improve outcomes.

Psychotherapeutic interventions for burns patients and the potential use with Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis patients: A systematic integrative review

Background

The existing evidence demonstrates that survivors of SJS/TEN have reported long-lasting psychological effects of their condition. Burns patients experience similar psychological effects. It is important to look at ways to help allay the psychological complications of SJS/TEN. As there is an absence of evidence on SJS/TEN psychotherapeutic interventions, it was judged to be beneficial to determine the evidence underpinning psychotherapeutic interventions used with burns patients.

Aims and objectives

The aim of this systematic integrative review was to synthesize the evidence relating to psychotherapeutic interventions used with adult burns patients and patients with SJS/TEN.

Method

The systematic review was guided by Whittemore and Knafl’s integrative review process and the PRISMA guidelines. Nine databases were searched for English and French language papers published January 2008 to January 2021. The protocol for the review was registered with PROSPERO.

Results

Following a screening process, 17 studies were included in the review. Two themes were identified using content analysis, (i) Empirically supported psychotherapeutic treatments, (ii) Alternative psychotherapeutic treatments. This review revealed no evidence on specific psychotherapeutic interventions for patients with SJS/TEN. Some of the interventions used with burns patients, viz. relaxation therapy, hypnosis and cognitive behavioral therapy showed some significant benefits. However, the evidence for burns patients is mainly focused on pain and pain anxiety as outcomes.

Conclusion

Following further research, some of the interventions deployed in burns patients may be applicable to SJS/TEN patients, particularly stress reduction techniques. In addition, the caring behaviours such as compassion, respect, and getting to know the patient as a person are important components to psychological care.

Concomitance or consequence? Stevens-Johnson syndrome in COVID-19: A case report

The novel coronavirus infection has been, and still is, a pressing medical problem with a catastrophic effect, not only from a medical point of view, but also from an economic and social one. The cutaneous manifestations of the disease have a diverse morphology and can signal the presence of the infection. The present article reports the case of a 77-year-old male patient admitted at The Sf. Parascheva Clinical Hospital of Infectious Diseases in Iasi (Romania) after testing positive for SARS CoV-2 infection. Initially, the patient presented a pruriginous generalized maculopapular-erythematous eruption with a tendency towards confluence, peri-oro-nasal meliceric crusts and desquamation of the skin on the third anterosuperior and posterior thorax, scalp and forehead, which was accompanied by low back pain, headache and orbital pain. The suspicion of Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) was raised, and treatment was given according to the recommendation of the hospital dermatologist. This association raises multiple questions regarding whether SJS is a cutaneous manifestation of COVID-19 or if there was a concomitance between the viral infection and the immune reaction. The combination of SJS and COVID-19 can have a fatal outcome if not recognized and promptly treated. To our knowledge, this is the first case of SJS in a patient diagnosed with SARS CoV-2 infection in Romania.

Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are rare and severe skin and mucosal reactions that are associated with high mortality. Despite the severity, an evidence-based treatment protocol for SJS/TEN is still lacking.

METHOD

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the PubMed database was searched using the following terms: [Stevens-Johnson syndrome] OR [toxic epidermal necrolysis] AND [therapy] OR [treatment] over a 20-year period (1999-2019) in the German and English language. All clinical studies reporting on the treatment of SJS/TEN were included, and epidemiological and diagnostic aspects of treatment were analysed. A meta-analysis was conducted on all comparative clinical studies that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 88 studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting outcomes in 2647 patients. Treatment was either supportive or used systemic corticosteroid, intravenous immunoglobulin, plasmapheresis, cyclosporine, thalidomide or cyclophosphamide therapy. The meta-analysis included 16 (18%) studies, reporting outcomes in 976 (37%) patients. Systemic glucocorticoids showed a survival benefit for SJS/TEN patients in all analyses compared with other forms of treatment. Cyclosporine treatment also showed promising results, despite being used in a small cohort of patients. No beneficial effects on mortality could be demonstrated for intravenous immunoglobulins.

CONCLUSION

Glucocorticoids and cyclosporine may be tentatively recommended as the most promising immunomodulatory therapies for SJS/TEN, but these results should be investigated in future prospective controlled trials.

Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis: a 10-year experience in a burns unit

OBJECTIVE

Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and its more severe counterpart, toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), are skin hypersensitivity reactions defined by epidermal blistering and necrosis. The exact pathophysiology of SJS/TEN is yet to be deciphered, but a number of risk factors have been identified including adverse drug reactions. The diagnosis of SJS/TEN is made on a clinical basis, and treatment consists of supportive care and occasionally immunosuppressants, such as cyclosporin, high-dose intravenous immunoglobulins and/or corticosteroids. Mortality rates can reach 20-25% in adults but are reduced with early intervention. To identify optimal treatment regimens, to better understand the patient cohort affected, and to help identify key risk factors for mortality, we report our experience with the treatment and management of SJS/TEN patients.

METHODS

A retrospective review of consecutive patients with SJS and/or TEN admitted to a single burns centre in Germany, between 2008 and 2018, was conducted. The primary outcomes of demographics, clinical course, treatment and patient-reported outcomes were recorded and compared with a control group of patients with burns without a diagnosis of SJS/TEN.

RESULTS

A total of 23 patients with SJS/TEN met the inclusion criteria: 17 (74%) with TEN; four (17%) with SJS/TEN overlap; and two (9%) with SJS. Of the patients, 14 (61%) were female and nine (39%) were male. Patient age ranged from 32-78 years (mean: 52 years). A matched cohort of 23 patients with burns served as the control group. All patients received standard of care with a multidisciplinary team. Compared with the control group, SJS/TEN patients had higher mortality rates (n=6, 26% versus n=8, 35%, respectively). The average age of death was 69 years in SJS/TEN patients versus 63 years in control group patients. Age and SCORTEN scores were significant predictors of mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

SJS and TEN are rare but extreme reactions of the skin and mucosa, associated with high disease mortality rates. This 10-year single-centre retrospective review contributes to the bank of information for reviews evaluating the management of SJS/TEN patients.

Recognition and Management of Severe Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions (Including Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms, Stevens-Johnson Syndrome, and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis)

Severe cutaneous adverse reactions to medications (SCARs) include drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, toxic epidermal necrolysis, and acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis. They are all non-immunoglobulin E mediated hypersensitivity reaction patterns, distinguished from simple cutaneous drug eruptions by immunologic pathogenesis and internal organ involvement. Herein the clinical features, diagnostic workup, and management considerations are presented for each of these major SCARs.

Diagnostic procedures & practices in drug allergy/hypersensitivity: a survey of 13 Asian countries

BACKGROUND

The issues and challenges in the diagnosis of drug allergy/hypersensitivity among children and adults in Asia are likely to be different from non-Asian countries.

OBJECTIVE

To study the diagnostic modalities used in the evaluation and management of drug allergy/drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) among member societies of the Asia Pacific Association of Allergy, Asthma and Clinical Immunology (APAAACI).

METHODS

A questionnaire comprising 41 questions was circulated electronically to member societies and individual members of APAAACI between January 23, 2020 and March 6, 2020.

RESULTS

Twenty-six respondents from 15 member societies and 1 individual member responded. European DHR guidelines were most commonly used. Skin prick and intradermal testing was used by 100%, with only 60% having access to commercial penicillin skin test reagents. In vitro-specific IgE tests were used by 75%, and basophil activation test by 56.3% for immediate DHR. Patch tests were used by 75% in contrast to lymphocyte transformation tests by 25% for nonimmediate DHR. Drug provocation tests were used by 68.8%, the most common indication being to exclude hypersensitivity where history/symptoms were not suggestive of drug hypersensitivity/allergy (93.3%). Human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genotype testing was mandatory among 25% respondents before new carbamazepine prescriptions, and 8.3% for allopurinol prescriptions.

CONCLUSIONS

There was increased use of skin testing for iodinated contrast media hypersensitivity and patch testing for nonimmediate DHR. HLA genotype testing prior to new carbamazepine, allopurinol and abacavir prescriptions remain variable despite strong associations for severe cutaneous adverse reactions with Asian ethnicity. Results of this survey form a useful framework for developing educational and training needs and for improving access to drug allergy diagnostic and treatment modalities across APAAACI member societies.

Distinguishing Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis from clinical mimickers during inpatient dermatologic consultation-A retrospective chart review

BACKGROUND

Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are life-threatening conditions that may present with similar findings to other severe dermatologic diseases.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this exploratory study was to explore factors associated with SJS/TEN and develop a model that provides the predicted probability of SJS/TEN for patients for whom the diagnosis of SJS/TEN is considered.

METHODS

Retrospective review of consultations for patients with suspected SJS, TEN, or overlap at 4 academic dermatology consultation services.

RESULTS

Overall, 208 patients were included; 59 (28.4%) had a final diagnosis of SJS/TEN, and 149 (71.6%) were given a different diagnosis. The most common mimickers were drug hypersensitivity syndrome (n = 21, 10.1%), morbilliform drug eruption (n = 18, 8.7%), erythema multiforme (n = 15, 7.2%), and acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (n = 13, 6.2%). Nikolsky sign, atypical targets, fever, and lymphopenia were included in a model for predicting the probability of SJS/TEN.

LIMITATIONS

All cases were obtained from academic centers, which may limit the generalization of findings to community-based settings. This was an exploratory study with a small number of cases, and external validation of the model performance is needed.

CONCLUSION

Early dermatologic evaluation of patients with suspected SJS/TEN is key to separating patients with this condition from those who ultimately receive diagnoses of other serious skin diseases.