Skin diseases in Turkish renal transplant recipients

Alper, Sibel; Kilinc, Isil; Duman, Soner; Töz, Hüseyin; Ceylan, Can; Ünal, İdil; Aytimur, Derya

doi:10.1111/j.1365-4632.2004.02244.x

Cited by 17 publications

(19 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The risk of skin lesions in RTRs has been frequently described; however, it differs markedly by ethnic groups, skin type, and geographical location (3, 4). On the other hand, few reports deal with case–control studies of skin infections in RTRs (5, 6).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Skin infections in Egyptian renal transplant recipients

Bakr

Elsawy

Hamdy

et al. 2010

Transplant Infectious Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our RTRs have higher prevalence rates of folliculitis and superficial fungal infections than the healthy population and they should be searched for in every patient with renal transplantation to ensure early treatment and avoid complications. Low-dose ketoconazole should be considered in renal transplant populations with high rates of superficial fungal infections, as it may reduce risk of such infections.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Skin infections in Egyptian renal transplant recipients

Bakr

Elsawy

Hamdy

et al. 2010

Transplant Infectious Dis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More recently, Abdelaziz et al [7] reported a lower prevalence in Egyptian patients (7.6%), but in this case, the prevalence was significantly higher than that of healthy control individuals (2.3%). In contrast, Gulec et al [9] and Alper et al [31] reported higher OM rates in Turkish patients (respectively 12.7 and 12.4%). However, in the study of Gulec et al [9], the rate was similar to that in the control group, whereas in the study of Alper et al [31], it was significantly higher.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…In contrast, Gulec et al [9] and Alper et al [31] reported higher OM rates in Turkish patients (respectively 12.7 and 12.4%). However, in the study of Gulec et al [9], the rate was similar to that in the control group, whereas in the study of Alper et al [31], it was significantly higher. The difference in rates between these stud- Table 6.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 76%

“…Susceptibility data for dermatophytes and yeast species against four antifungal agents using the minimum inhibitory concentration ies may rely in part in the different methods used for the diagnosis of OM. While Alper et al [31] did not provide information regarding the mycological methods, Abdelaziz et al [7] based the mycological diagnosis on culture alone, and Gulec et al [9] performed DME with subsequent mycological culture. In fact, the sensitivity of mycological culture is reported to be significantly lower than that of the DME and the diagnosis of OM should be considered when there is a positive DME even if the culture does not yield fungal growth [32] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hemodialysis and Kidney Transplantation as Predisposing Conditions to Onychomycosis

Filho

Ventura²,

Criado

et al. 2017

Nephron

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aim: Onychomycosis (OM) is one of the commonest superficial fungal infections. Patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD) treatment and kidney transplant recipients (KTR) are considered at risk of contracting fungal infections, but the few published data do not reach the conclusion of whether they are predisposed to OM. This study aimed to determine the prevalence and etiology of OM in these patients and to determine the antifungal susceptibility profile of the isolated fungal species. Methods: We recruited 149 HD patients, 187 KTR, and a control group comprising 174 patients attending an internal medicine service with other diseases than renal diseases. All patients underwent an examination of all toenails to check for the presence of OM. Antifungal susceptibility tests were performed following the Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute (CLSI) recommendations. Results: The prevalence rates of OM in HD patients (23.4%) and KTR (23.0%) were significantly higher than those in age- and sex-matched control groups (13.2%). In HD patients, OM was associated with diabetes but not with the duration of dialysis. In KTR, OM was more prevalent in those without diabetes and likely also in those using mycophenolate mofetil or azathioprine but was not associated with the duration of transplantation. Trichophyton rubrum was the most prevalent species (45.9%) followed by T. mentagrophytes (24.5%) and Candida parapsilosis (18.0%). Fluconazole, itraconazole, voriconazole, and terbinafine were all efficient against the isolates of dermatophyte, with terbinafine showing the lowest and fluconazole the highest minimal inhibitory concentrations. All isolates of C. parapsilosis were sensitive to the antifungals according to the CLSI criteria. Conclusion: We found a high prevalence of OM in HD and KTR patients and suggest that these conditions should be considered a risk factor of OM. All 4 antifungals evaluated in the study showed good in vitro activity against the etiologic agents.

show abstract

“…In a systematic overview made in Leiden, 591 nonmalignant skin diseases were registered in 1768 (33%) organ transplant recipients followed over 13 years [1]. Smaller series reported that the prevalence of nonmalignant skin lesions in transplant recipients may range between 49% and 87% [2–5]. The lesions are mainly related to the prolonged use of immunosuppressive drugs, but an important contributing role may also be played by exposure to sunlight and viral infections.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Nonneoplastic mucocutaneous lesions in organ transplant recipients

Ponticelli¹,

Bencini²

2011

Transplant International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nonneoplastic cutaneous or mucosal complications are frequent in organ transplant recipients. In a systematic overview made in Leiden, 591 nonmalignant skin diseases were registered in 1768 (33%) organ transplant recipients followed over 13 years [1]. Smaller series reported that the prevalence of nonmalignant skin lesions in transplant recipients may range between 49% and 87% [2][3][4][5]. The lesions are mainly related to the prolonged use of immunosuppressive drugs, but an important contributing role may also be played by exposure to sunlight and viral infections. Although the pathogenesis of these lesions is often multifactorial, we will separate them into lesions caused by drugs and by infections.Drug-related skin lesions (Table 1) Calcium channel blockers can cause some cutaneous abnormalities, including photo-damage of the head and neck, teleangiectasia, and solar elastosis [6] as well as gingival hyperplasia [7]. However, most skin lesions in renal transplant recipients are caused by immunosuppressive drugs, in particular glucocorticoids and cyclosporine. An important consequence of the esthetic changes caused by these agents is a poor adherence to treatment which represents a major cause of graft failure [8]. GlucocorticoidsRenal transplant recipients given glucocorticoids may show a number of dermatological lesions which are related to the doses and the time of exposure of these agents. While the doses of glucocorticoids used in transplantation were very high in the recent past, the current immunosuppression is based on low doses of glucocorticoids and some units even treat transplant recipients with steroid-free regimens. As a consequence, the skin changes Keywords fungal infections, mucocutaneous lesions, transplant complications, transplantation and skin lesions. CorrespondenceClaudio Ponticelli MD, Istituto Scientifico Humanitas,

show abstract

Skin diseases in Turkish renal transplant recipients

Cited by 17 publications

References 15 publications

Skin infections in Egyptian renal transplant recipients

Skin infections in Egyptian renal transplant recipients

Hemodialysis and Kidney Transplantation as Predisposing Conditions to Onychomycosis

Nonneoplastic mucocutaneous lesions in organ transplant recipients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About