Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
    • COVID-19 articles
    • Obituary notices
  • Authors & Reviewers
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
    • Open access
    • Patient engagement
  • Physicians & Subscribers
    • Benefits for Canadian physicians
    • CPD Credits for CMA Members
    • Subscribe to CMAJ Print
    • Subscription prices
    • Obituary notices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2023
    • Avis de décès
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
  • Listen to CMAJ podcasts
Practice

Cutaneous leishmaniasis in a returning traveller

Eric Demers, David M. Forrest and Gabriele E. Weichert
CMAJ May 14, 2013 185 (8) 681-683; DOI: https://doi.org/10.1503/cmaj.120694
Eric Demers
From the Biology Department (Demers), Vancouver Island University; Nanaimo Regional General Hospital (Forrest); and Brickyard Medical Clinic (Weichert), Nanaimo, BC
PhD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected]
David M. Forrest
From the Biology Department (Demers), Vancouver Island University; Nanaimo Regional General Hospital (Forrest); and Brickyard Medical Clinic (Weichert), Nanaimo, BC
MD MHSc
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gabriele E. Weichert
From the Biology Department (Demers), Vancouver Island University; Nanaimo Regional General Hospital (Forrest); and Brickyard Medical Clinic (Weichert), Nanaimo, BC
MD
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

An otherwise healthy 42-year-old man presented with a small erythematous nodule on the superior part of his right ear and substantial swelling of the entire pinna (Figure 1A), which he had first noticed 2 weeks before presentation. There were no other lesions, palpable lymphadenopathy or systemic symptoms. Eleven weeks before his initial presentation, the patient, a biologist, had conducted a university field school in Belize, Central America, which included travel in rainforest habitats. None of the other 23 members of the group had similar cutaneous lesions, although 5 had acquired botfly infestations.

Figure 1:
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1:

External manifestation of cutaneous leishmaniasis in a 42-year-old man. Photographs depict (A) initial presentation and thereafter at intervals of (B) 10 weeks, (C) 13 weeks, (D) 16 weeks, (E) 22 weeks and (F) 24 weeks.

The condition was initially treated as a bacterial infection with two 7-day courses of antibiotics (cloxacillin and cephalexin), with no response. Over a period of 10 weeks, the nodule and surrounding area became progressively ulcerated, with purulent exudates and crusting of most of the pinna superior to the ear canal (Figure 1B). Giemsa stain of a skin biopsy showed several intracellular and free, small, oval bodies (amastigotes) consistent with Leishmania species (Figure 2). In vitro culture and polymerase chain reaction analysis identified Leishmania mexicana.

Figure 2:
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2:

Geimsa stain of a biopsy specimen of the ear ulcer. (A) Epidermal and dermal tissue showing impetiginized hyperkeratosis (original magnification × 100). (B) Multiple intracellular amastigotes (arrows) of Leishmania mexicana in parasitophorous vacuoles of histiocytes (original magnification × 1000).

Initial antileishmanial treatment with liposomal amphotericin B was administered daily by intravenous infusion over 5 days (5 mg/kg on day 1, 3 mg/kg on days 2–5; total dose 17 mg/kg). Little improvement ensued over a 3-week (Figure 1C) and 6-week (Figure 1D) period, which suggested that the treatment regimen had been ineffective. Consequently, oral fluconazole (400 mg/d) was started and continued for 56 days. Because there was no apparent change in the lesion during the first 25 days of this treatment, twice-weekly intralesional injections of the pentavalent antimonial compound sodium stibogluconate were given at a dosage of 50 mg/cm2 (2 mL per injection) for 5 weeks. Except for some considerable localized pain during injection, no major adverse effects were observed. There was marked improvement of the lesion after 3 weeks (Figure 1E) and 5 weeks (Figure 1F) of this treatment.

Discussion

Cutaneous leishmaniasis is endemic to many tropical and subtropical regions of the world, with worldwide incidence of about 1.5 million new cases each year.1 The condition is caused by protozoan parasites of the Leishmania genus, which are transmitted from infected mammals to humans through the bite of phlebotomine sandflies. When promastigote stages are injected by blood-feeding sandflies into the mammalian host, they invade macrophages and transform into amastigotes, which replicate extensively within a parasitophorous vacuole.2 In the case of cutaneous forms of leishmaniasis, the amastigotes multiply in the reticuloendothelial system of macrophages of the skin around the initial bite wound, eventually producing a relatively large sore or ulcer. Although the cutaneous disease is not as severe as mucocutaneous and visceral forms of leishmaniasis, it can have substantial consequences, including permanent scarring, disfigurement and possible parasite dissemination.1

This cutaneous presentation of leishmaniasis endemic in the rainforests of Central America is commonly referred to as the “chiclero ulcer” or in Belize as the “bay sore.” Cutaneous leishmaniasis caused by L. mexicana typically heals spontaneously within a few months. Complications arise when lesions are associated with the cartilaginous pinna of the ear because of its poor vascularization and limited immune response. Leishmanial lesions of the ear may last for several months to many years and may cause severe mutilation of the pinna if left untreated.3

Diagnosis

Traditionally, the diagnosis of leishmaniasis has relied heavily on a history of travel to a disease-endemic region, typical clinical features, microscopic identification of amastigotes by histology or direct microscopy of biopsy smears or aspirates, and the growth of promastigotes in culture.1 The sensitivity of these techniques, however, can be variable, depending on parasite number and dispersion in samples, technical expertise and media used to culture the parasite. Polymerase chain reaction testing has a specificity of up to 100%, and 20%–30% greater sensitivity than conventional methods.1

Because of the broad clinical spectrum of cutaneous leishmaniasis, its long incubation period and resemblance to common skin diseases such as bacterial or fungal infections and nonmelanoma skin cancers, diagnosis is often delayed. Early diagnosis is important, because the parasite replicates rapidly and the lesion can grow substantially once established. In addition, because some Leishmania species (e.g., L. braziliensis and L. panamensis) have a propensity for mucosal spread,1 delayed diagnosis may lead to the need for complicated and potentially toxic treatments. Furthermore, because treatment for various species of Leishmania may be different, delayed or improper identification of the condition may lead to suboptimal treatment, prolonging the course of the disease and resulting in disfiguring scars.4

Treatment

The therapeutic arsenal against leishmaniasis is relatively limited, and the absence of consistent clinical practice guidelines in North America can constrain its effective treatment.

Pentavalent antimonial compounds have been the therapeutic drugs of choice for the treatment of localized cutaneous leishmaniasis for more than 50 years.5 The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends treating cutaneous leishmaniasis with pentavalent antimonial drugs at 20 mg/kg daily intramuscularly or intravenously for 20–28 consecutive days.6 A meta-analysis of 23 studies reported a cure rate of 76.5% among a total of 1133 patients.7 These drugs have not been approved for general sale in Canada and must be obtained through Health Canada’s Special Access Programme.

The polyene antibiotic amphotericin B represents an alternative treatment for cutaneous leishmaniasis, especially formulations with reduced toxicity such as liposomal amphotericin B.5 In 1997, the US Food and Drug Administration approved liposomal amphotericin B for the treatment of visceral leishmaniasis at a dose of 3 mg/kg daily for 7 doses.8 Despite the common use of liposomal amphotericin B in the treatment of the visceral form of leishmaniasis,1 there have been no controlled studies investigating its use in the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis. A small retrospective study reported a cure rate of 84% (16 of 19 patients) with the initial treatment regimen; the remaining patients were cured with additional dosing.8

Although oral treatment with azole compounds (e.g., fluconazole) has shown variable success rates (30%–89% cure rates) for Leishmania species, their ease of administration and well-studied safety profile make them frequently used agents for cutaneous leishmaniasis.1

Intralesional injections with sodium stibogluconate have been shown to be effective for the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis and are better tolerated than systemic therapy with antimonial compounds.9 For local therapy of L. mexicana, WHO recommends 1–5 mL of antimonial compounds (1–5 infiltrations) administered every 3–7 days for 3–4 weeks.6 In a cohort study, 220 patients with L. tropica lesions in India received intralesional injections of sodium stibogluconate in doses of 50 mg/cm2 weekly or twice weekly for 3–4 weeks.9 Cure rates of 92% and 96%, respectively, were observed, and there were no relapses in cured patients reported up to 2 years after treatment. The most common adverse effect was localized pain and edema within 24 hours of injection.9

Cutaneous leishmaniasis in returning travellers

Increased travel to regions where cutaneous leishmaniasis is endemic has been associated with an increase in cases of the disease in returning travellers, with many of these cases related to travel to Latin America.4 Although there has been no systematic review of imported cutaneous leishmaniasis to Canada, some reports have been published.10,11 Because Canadians have increased their travel to Central and South America by an average of 14% annually between 2003 and 2010,12 the occurrence of cutaneous leishmaniasis in returning Canadian travellers may also increase.

In Central and South America, transmission of leishmaniasis is traditionally restricted to rainforest habitats.13 Travellers to these habitats (e.g., ecotourists, biologists) may be unaware that they have acquired the parasite. The variable incubation period of the disease (typically 2 weeks to 6 months)1 may delay clinical manifestations until after travellers have returned to their home country, which can pose a diagnostic challenge for clinicians who may be unfamiliar with the disease’s manifestations. Therefore, emergence of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the developed world warrants increased awareness from primary care physicians. In addition, lack of ready availability and access to appropriate antiparasitic therapy may present an obstacle in treatment. Referral to an infectious disease specialist should be considered for the selection of appropriate treatment.

Travellers can reduce the risk of infection by protecting themselves from sandfly bites, especially from dusk to dawn, when sandflies generally are the most active. Such protection includes wearing clothing that minimizes the amount of exposed skin, using bed netting and applying insect repellent to exposed skin. Sandflies are susceptible to insecticide repellents that contain the chemical DEET (diethyltoluamide).1

In the future, presentation of this disease may also increase in nontravellers. Climate change is expected to exacerbate the ecological risk of human exposure to leishmaniasis in the southern United States and, possibly, parts of southern Canada.13 This points to the importance of more widespread knowledge of this condition among health care providers, increased surveillance for leishmaniasis in the US and Canada, and ready availability of antimonial compounds for treatment.

Key points
  • Early diagnosis of cutaneous leishmaniasis is important to ensure early treatment and to limit mutilation or scarring.

  • Referral to an infectious disease specialist should be considered for selection of appropriate treatment.

  • Local therapy may be an appropriate mode of treatment.

  • With climate change, leishmaniasis may be seen more frequently in North America.

Acknowledgement

The authors acknowledge Tim Goater for his contribution regarding the biology of the Leishmania parasite and for his editorial assistance in preparing the manuscript for submission.

Footnotes

  • Competing interests: None declared.

  • This article has been peer reviewed.

  • Contributors: All of the authors contributed to the conception and design of the manuscript. Eric Demers drafted the article, which David Forrest and Gabriele Weichert revised critically for important intellectual content. All of the authors gave final approval of the version submitted for publication.

References

  1. ↵
    1. Reithinger R,
    2. Dujardin JC,
    3. Louzir H,
    4. et al
    . Cutaneous leishmaniasis. Lancet Infect Dis 2007;7:581–96.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Alexander J,
    2. Satoskar AR,
    3. Russell DG
    . Leishmania species: models of intracellular parasitism. J Cell Sci 1999;112:2993–3002.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  3. ↵
    1. Vargas-Gonzalez A,
    2. Canto-Lara SB,
    3. Damian-Centeno AG,
    4. et al
    . Response of cutaneous leishmaniasis (chiclero’s ulcer) to treatment with meglumine antimoniate in southeast Mexico. Am J Trop Med Hyg 1999;61:960–3.
    OpenUrlAbstract
  4. ↵
    1. Blum JA,
    2. Hatz CF
    . Treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis in travelers 2009. J Travel Med 2009;16:123–31.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Almeida OLS,
    2. Santos JB
    . Advances in the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis in the new world in the last ten years: a systematic literature review. An Bras Dermatol 2011;86:497–506.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    World Health Organization. Control of the leishmaniasis: report of a meeting of the WHO Expert Committee on the Control of leishmaniases; 2010 Mar. 22–26; Geneva. Geneva (Switzerland): The Organization; 2010.
  7. ↵
    1. Tuon FF,
    2. Amato VS,
    3. Graf ME,
    4. et al
    . Treatment of New World cutaneous leishmaniasis — a systematic review with a meta-analysis. Int J Dermatol 2008;47:109–24.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Wortmann G,
    2. Zapor M,
    3. Ressner R,
    4. et al
    . Lipsosomal amphotericin B for treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis. Am J Trop Med Hyg 2010;83:1028–33.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    1. Bumb RA,
    2. Mehta RD,
    3. Ghiya BC,
    4. et al
    . Efficacy of short-duration (twice weekly) intralesional sodium stibogluconate in treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis in India. Br J Dermatol 2010;163:854–8.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Haider S,
    2. Boutross-Tadross O,
    3. Radhi J,
    4. et al
    . Cutaneous ulcer in a man returning from Central America. CMAJ 2003;168:590–1.
    OpenUrlFREE Full Text
  11. ↵
    1. Abadir A,
    2. Patel A,
    3. Haider S
    . Systemic therapy of New World cutaneous leishmaniasis: a case report and review article. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol 2010;21:e79–83.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  12. ↵
    International travel. Ottawa (ON): Statistics Canada; modified 2013. Available: www5.statcan.gc.ca/bsolc/olc-cel/olc-cel?catno=66-201-X&chropg=1&lang=eng (accessed 2012 Mar. 5)
  13. ↵
    1. González C,
    2. Wang O,
    3. Strutz SE,
    4. et al
    . Climate change and risk of leishmaniasis in North America: predictions from ecological niche models of vector and reservoir species. PLoS Negl Trop Dis 2010;4:e585.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Canadian Medical Association Journal: 185 (8)
CMAJ
Vol. 185, Issue 8
14 May 2013
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Respond to this article
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Cutaneous leishmaniasis in a returning traveller
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Cutaneous leishmaniasis in a returning traveller
Eric Demers, David M. Forrest, Gabriele E. Weichert
CMAJ May 2013, 185 (8) 681-683; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.120694

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Cutaneous leishmaniasis in a returning traveller
Eric Demers, David M. Forrest, Gabriele E. Weichert
CMAJ May 2013, 185 (8) 681-683; DOI: 10.1503/cmaj.120694
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Discussion
    • Diagnosis
    • Treatment
    • Cutaneous leishmaniasis in returning travellers
    • Acknowledgement
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Related Content
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Highlights
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Dermal leishmaniasis in a 25-year-old Syrian refugee
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Tick-borne red meat allergy (α-gal syndrome)
  • Severe vitamin B12 deficiency causing pseudo-thrombotic microangiopathy
  • SARS-CoV-2 vaccination in pregnancy
Show more Practice

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Infectious diseases

 

View Latest Classified Ads

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • CPD credits
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Advisory Panels
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions
CMAJ Group

Copyright 2023, CMA Impact Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of these resources in an accessible format, please contact us at CMAJ Group, 500-1410 Blair Towers Place, Ottawa ON, K1J 9B9; p: 1-888-855-2555; e: [email protected]

CMA Civility, Accessibility, Privacy

 

Powered by HighWire