OBJECTIVES: To describe the treatment of cutaneous myiasis in three dogs caused by the larvae of Ch. bezziana in Malaysia and their treatment with spinosad plus milbemycin.
RESULTS: In all dogs, a single oral dose of spinosad plus milbemycin at the recommended dosage of 31-62 mg/kg and 0.5-1.0 mg/kg, respectively, was able to kill all larvae within 8 h. Most dead larvae fell off the host and those remaining on the host were dead and easily removed with simple saline flushing and gentle debridement. Neither general anaesthesia nor aggressive mechanical debridement were needed in any patient.
CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE: Oral spinosad plus milbemycin is a safe, licensed and effective treatment at the recommended dose for the rapid elimination of Ch. bezziana myiasis, with no need for sedation or anaesthesia.
OBJECTIVES: To assess and compare the effects of different antibiotic regimens for treatment of scrub typhus.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following databases up to 8 January 2018: the Cochrane Infectious Diseases Group specialized trials register; CENTRAL, in the Cochrane Library (2018, Issue 1); MEDLINE; Embase; LILACS; and the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT). We checked references and contacted study authors for additional data. We applied no language or date restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing antibiotic regimens in people with the diagnosis of scrub typhus based on clinical symptoms and compatible laboratory tests (excluding the Weil-Felix test).
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: For this update, two review authors re-extracted all data and assessed the certainty of evidence. We meta-analysed data to calculate risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes when appropriate, and elsewhere tabulated data to facilitate narrative analysis.
MAIN RESULTS: We included six RCTs and one quasi-RCT with 548 participants; they took place in the Asia-Pacific region: Korea (three trials), Malaysia (one trial), and Thailand (three trials). Only one trial included children younger than 15 years (N = 57). We judged five trials to be at high risk of performance and detection bias owing to inadequate blinding. Trials were heterogenous in terms of dosing of interventions and outcome measures. Across trials, treatment failure rates were low.Two trials compared doxycycline to tetracycline. For treatment failure, the difference between doxycycline and tetracycline is uncertain (very low-certainty evidence). Doxycycline compared to tetracycline may make little or no difference in resolution of fever within 48 hours (risk ratio (RR) 1.14, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 1.44, 55 participants; one trial; low-certainty evidence) and in time to defervescence (116 participants; one trial; low-certainty evidence). We were unable to extract data for other outcomes.Three trials compared doxycycline versus macrolides. For most outcomes, including treatment failure, resolution of fever within 48 hours, time to defervescence, and serious adverse events, we are uncertain whether study results show a difference between doxycycline and macrolides (very low-certainty evidence). Macrolides compared to doxycycline may make little or no difference in the proportion of patients with resolution of fever within five days (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.10; 185 participants; two trials; low-certainty evidence). Another trial compared azithromycin versus doxycycline or chloramphenicol in children, but we were not able to disaggregate date for the doxycycline/chloramphenicol group.One trial compared doxycycline versus rifampicin. For all outcomes, we are uncertain whether study results show a difference between doxycycline and rifampicin (very low-certainty evidence). Of note, this trial deviated from the protocol after three out of eight patients who had received doxycycline and rifampicin combination therapy experienced treatment failure.Across trials, mild gastrointestinal side effects appeared to be more common with doxycycline than with comparator drugs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Tetracycline, doxycycline, azithromycin, and rifampicin are effective treatment options for scrub typhus and have resulted in few treatment failures. Chloramphenicol also remains a treatment option, but we could not include this among direct comparisons in this review.Most available evidence is of low or very low certainty. For specific outcomes, some low-certainty evidence suggests there may be little or no difference between tetracycline, doxycycline, and azithromycin as treatment options. Given very low-certainty evidence for rifampicin and the risk of inducing resistance in undiagnosed tuberculosis, clinicians should not regard this as a first-line treatment option. Clinicians could consider rifampicin as a second-line treatment option after exclusion of active tuberculosis.Further research should consist of additional adequately powered trials of doxycycline versus azithromycin or other macrolides, trials of other candidate antibiotics including rifampicin, and trials of treatments for severe scrub typhus. Researchers should standardize diagnostic techniques and reporting of clinical outcomes to allow robust comparisons.
METHODS: Patients from TREAT Asia HIV Observational Database (September 2015 data transfer) aged 18 years and older with a CD4 count <50 cells/mm at ART initiation were included. The effect of macrolide prophylaxis on HIV-associated mortality or AIDS-defining conditions (as a combined outcome) and HIV-associated mortality alone were evaluated using competing risk regression. Sensitivity analysis was conducted in patients with a CD4 <100 cells/mm at ART initiation.
RESULTS: Of 1345 eligible patients, 10.6% received macrolide prophylaxis. The rate of the combined outcome was 7.35 [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.04 to 8.95] per 100 patient-years, whereas the rate of HIV-associated mortality was 3.14 (95% CI: 2.35 to 4.19) per 100 patient-years. Macrolide use was associated with a significantly decreased risk of HIV-associated mortality (hazard ratio 0.10, 95% CI: 0.01 to 0.80, P = 0.031) but not with the combined outcome (hazard ratio 0.86, 95% CI: 0.32 to 2.229, P = 0.764). Sensitivity analyses showed consistent results among patients with a CD4 <100 cells/mm at ART initiation.
CONCLUSIONS: Macrolide prophylaxis is associated with improved survival among Asian HIV-infected patients with low CD4 cell counts and on ART. This study suggests the increased usage and coverage of macrolide prophylaxis among people living with HIV in Asia.
METHODS: Urine and urethral swab samples were collected from the primary public sexual health clinic in Singapore and tested for C. trachomatis (CT) or N. gonorrhoeae (NG) infection and for the presence of M. genitalium. Antibiotic resistance in M. genitalium strains detected was determined by screening for genomic mutations associated with macrolide and fluroquinolone resistance.
RESULTS: We report the results of a study into M. genitalium prevalence at the national sexual health clinic in Singapore. M. genitalium was heavily associated with CT infection (8.1% of cases), but present in only of 2.4% in CT negative cases and not independently linked to NG infection. Furthermore, we found high rates of resistance mutations to both macrolides (25%) and fluoroquinolones (37.5%) with a majority of resistant strains being dual-resistant. Resistance mutations were only found in strains from patients with CT co-infection.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results support targeted screening of CT positive patients for M. genitalium as a cost-effective strategy to reduce the incidence of M. genitalium in the absence of comprehensive routine screening. The high rate of dual resistance also highlights the need to ensure the availability of alternative antibiotics for the treatment of multi-drug resistant M. genitalium isolates.