Search

Antibiotic treatment proved itself as the mainstay of treatment for Buruli ulcer disease. This neglected tropical disease is caused by Mycobacterium ulcerans. Surgery persists as an adjunct therapy intended to reduce the mycobacterial load. In an earlier clinical trial, patients benefited from delaying the decision to operate. Nevertheless, the rate of surgical interventions differs highly per clinic. A retrospective study was conducted in six different Buruli ulcer (BU) treatment centers in Benin and Ghana. BU patients clinically diagnosed between January 2012 and December 2016 were included and surgical interventions during the follow-up period, at least one year after diagnosis, were recorded. Logistic regression analysis was carried out to estimate the effect of the treatment center on the decision to perform surgery, while controlling for interaction and confounders. A total of 1193 patients, 612 from Benin and 581 from Ghana, were included. In Benin, lesions were most frequently (42%) categorized as the most severe lesions (WHO criteria, category III), whereas in Ghana lesions were most frequently (44%) categorized as small lesions (WHO criteria, category I). In total 344 (29%) patients received surgical intervention. The percentage of patients receiving surgical intervention varied between hospitals from 1.5% to 72%. Patients treated in one of the centers in Benin were much more likely to have surgery compared to the clinic in Ghana with the lowest rate of surgical intervention (RR = 46.7 CI 95% [17.5–124.8]). Even after adjusting for confounders (severity of disease, age, sex, limitation of movement at joint at time of diagnosis, ulcer and critical sites), rates of surgical interventions varied highly. The decision to perform surgery to reduce the mycobacterial load in BU varies highly per clinic. Evidence based guidelines are needed to guide the role of surgery in the treatment of BU Buruli ulcer is a necrotizing and disabling skin infection, caused by Mycobacterium ulcerans. The infection, a skin-related Neglected Tropical Diseases, affects mostly people living in limited resources settings. Since the introduction of rifampicin based combination antibiotic therapy as standard care, the role of surgery as adjunct therapy to kill M. ulcerans is less defined and understood. A randomized controlled trial showed benefit from delaying the decision to operate. Nevertheless, the rate of surgical interventions differs highly per clinic. We present the differences in rate of surgical interventions in six different Buruli ulcer treatment centers in Ghana and Benin. We demonstrate that these differences mainly depend on the opinion of the health care workers working in the treatment centers even after adjusting for disease severity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Buruli ulcer is a neglected tropical disease caused by Mycobacterium ulcerans infection that damages the skin and subcutis. It is most prevalent in western and central Africa and Australia. Standard antimicrobial treatment with oral rifampicin 10 mg/kg plus intramuscular streptomycin 15 mg/kg once daily for 8 weeks (RS8) is highly effective, but streptomycin injections are painful and potentially harmful. We aimed to compare the efficacy and tolerability of fully oral rifampicin 10 mg/kg plus clarithromycin 15 mg/kg extended release once daily for 8 weeks (RC8) with that of RS8 for treatment of early Buruli ulcer lesions., Methods: We did an open-label, non-inferiority, randomised (1:1 with blocks of six), multicentre, phase 3 clinical trial comparing fully oral RC8 with RS8 in patients with early, limited Buruli ulcer lesions. There were four trial sites in hospitals in Ghana (Agogo, Tepa, Nkawie, Dunkwa) and one in Benin (Pobè). Participants were included if they were aged 5 years or older and had typical Buruli ulcer with no more than one lesion (caterories I and II) no larger than 10 cm in diameter. The trial was open label, and neither the investigators who took measurements of the lesions nor the attending doctors were masked to treatment assignment. The primary clinical endpoint was lesion healing (ie, full epithelialisation or stable scar) without recurrence at 52 weeks after start of antimicrobial therapy. The primary endpoint and safety were assessed in the intention-to-treat population. A sample size of 332 participants was calculated to detect inferiority of RC8 by a margin of 12%. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01659437., Findings: Between Jan 1, 2013, and Dec 31, 2017, participants were recruited to the trial. We stopped recruitment after 310 participants. Median age of participants was 14 years (IQR 10-29) and 153 (52%) were female. 297 patients had PCR-confirmed Buruli ulcer; 151 (51%) were assigned to RS8 treatment, and 146 (49%) received oral RC8 treatment. In the RS8 group, lesions healed in 144 (95%, 95% CI 91 to 98) of 151 patients, whereas lesions healed in 140 (96%, 91 to 99) of 146 patients in the RC8 group. The difference in proportion, -0·5% (-5·2 to 4·2), was not significantly greater than zero (p=0·59), showing that RC8 treatment is non-inferior to RS8 treatment for lesion healing at 52 weeks. Treatment-related adverse events were recorded in 20 (13%) patients receiving RS8 and in nine (7%) patients receiving RC8. Most adverse events were grade 1-2, but one (1%) patient receiving RS8 developed serious ototoxicity and ended treatment after 6 weeks. No patients needed surgical resection. Four patients (two in each study group) had skin grafts., Interpretation: Fully oral RC8 regimen was non-inferior to RS8 for treatment of early, limited Buruli ulcer and was associated with fewer adverse events. Therefore, we propose that fully oral RC8 should be the preferred therapy for early, limited lesions of Buruli ulcer., Funding: WHO with additional support from MAP International, American Leprosy Missions, Fondation Raoul Follereau France, Buruli ulcer Groningen Foundation, Sanofi-Pasteur, and BuruliVac., (© 2020 World Health Organization; licensee Elsevier. This is an Open Access article published under the CC BY 3.0 IGO license which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. In any use of this article, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organisation, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. This notice should be preserved along with the article's original URL.)