BACKGROUND: Dermatophyte infection is almost exclusively a superficial cutaneous mycosis usually confined to the stratum corneum of nails and hairs of normal hosts. Deep cutaneous and subcutaneous infections due to dermatophytes are exceedingly rare and usually limited to immunosuppressed individuals. These infections remain chronic and persist in spite of treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We report two clinical cases of disseminated dermatophytic pseudomycetoma caused by Microsporum gypseum and Microsporum canis in immunosuppressed patients. RESULTS: Patient 1, in 2008, showed improvement with fluconazole, cephalothin, and terbinafine treatment for Microsporum gypseum. After suspension of the treatment, new lesions appeared and culture from material was positive. In 2009, she presented confluent papules and nodules forming plaques on her face and neck with the isolation of Microsporum canis. Clinical response to this treatment was poor. Patient 2 was affected by both tinea corporis due to Trichophyton rubrum and dermatophytic pseudomycetoma caused by Microsporum canis. The response to treatment was successful with oral itraconazole and local surgical excision. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to recognize these atypical presentations of dermatophytic infections in immunosuppressed patients, which may warrant a more aggressive treatment in order to achieve resolution.
BACKGROUND: Dermatophyte infection is almost exclusively a superficial cutaneous mycosis usually confined to the stratum corneum of nails and hairs of normal hosts. Deep cutaneous and subcutaneous infections due to dermatophytes are exceedingly rare and usually limited to immunosuppressed individuals. These infections remain chronic and persist in spite of treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We report two clinical cases of disseminated dermatophytic pseudomycetoma caused by Microsporum gypseum and Microsporum canis in immunosuppressed patients. RESULTS:Patient 1, in 2008, showed improvement with fluconazole, cephalothin, and terbinafine treatment for Microsporum gypseum. After suspension of the treatment, new lesions appeared and culture from material was positive. In 2009, she presented confluent papules and nodules forming plaques on her face and neck with the isolation of Microsporum canis. Clinical response to this treatment was poor. Patient 2 was affected by both tinea corporis due to Trichophyton rubrum and dermatophytic pseudomycetoma caused by Microsporum canis. The response to treatment was successful with oral itraconazole and local surgical excision. CONCLUSIONS: It is important to recognize these atypical presentations of dermatophytic infections in immunosuppressed patients, which may warrant a more aggressive treatment in order to achieve resolution.
Authors: Alexandro Bonifaz; Andrés Tirado-Sánchez; Luz Calderón; Amado Saúl; Javier Araiza; Marco Hernández; Gloria M González; Rosa María Ponce Journal: PLoS Negl Trop Dis Date: 2014-08-21