Suppr超能文献

[甲癣发病率上升——感染病原体谱有变化吗?]

[Increasing frequency of onychomycoses--is there a change in the spectrum of infectious agents?].

作者信息

Ginter G, Rieger E, Heigl K, Propst E

机构信息

Universitätsklinik für Dermatologie und Venerologie, Graz, Osterreich.

出版信息

Mycoses. 1996;39 Suppl 1:118-22. doi: 10.1111/j.1439-0507.1996.tb00517.x.

Abstract

The recently developed antifungal drugs are not equally effective against the fungi causing onychomycoses: dermatophytes, yeasts and non-dermatophyte filamentous fungi (NDFF). Therapeutic failures may be due to the use of antifungal agents not primarily effective against the particular fungus. Considering the high costs of systemic antifungal therapy, it is necessary to know the frequency distribution of the different fungi causing onychomycosis. In a retrospective study, we have analysed results of fungal cultures performed between 1974 and 1994. In particular, we have compared the time periods 1982-1984 and 1992-1994. Culture results from toe nails showed in 1982-1984 the following fungal pattern (n = 833): dermatophytes 61%, yeasts 15%, NDFF 17%, mixed infections 7%. Results from 1992-1994 (n = 930) revealed an increase of dermatophytes 86% at the expense of yeasts (7%), NDFF (3%) and mixed infections (3%). In finger nails, we found a more pronounced change of infectious agents from 1982-1984 (n = 509; dermatophytes 62%, yeasts 29%, NDFF 1%, mixed infections 7%) to 1992-1994 (n = 348; dermatophytes 45%, yeasts 52%, NDFF 0.3%, mixed infections 3%). The high rate of yeast isolations (52%) from finger nails in 1992-1994 is striking. The role of yeast isolates for pathogenesis of onychomycosis remains to be elucidated. Differentiation between colonisation and infection would be necessary. The effectiveness of oral antifungal drugs against dermatophytic nail infections is well documented. The effectiveness against yeasts and NDFF, however, has not been studied thoroughly, but is not supposed to be equal with the different antifungal agents. Determination of the infectious agents in onychomycoses is recommended in order to avoid therapeutic failures.

摘要

最近研发的抗真菌药物对引起甲癣的真菌(皮肤癣菌、酵母菌和非皮肤癣菌丝状真菌[NDFF])的疗效并不相同。治疗失败可能是由于使用了对特定真菌并非主要有效的抗真菌药物。考虑到全身抗真菌治疗费用高昂,有必要了解引起甲癣的不同真菌的频率分布情况。在一项回顾性研究中,我们分析了1974年至1994年间进行的真菌培养结果。特别是,我们比较了1982 - 1984年和1992 - 1994年这两个时间段。1982 - 1984年趾甲的培养结果显示出以下真菌模式(n = 833):皮肤癣菌61%,酵母菌15%,NDFF 17%,混合感染7%。1992 - 1994年(n = 930)的结果显示,皮肤癣菌增加到86%,而酵母菌(7%)、NDFF(3%)和混合感染(3%)的比例下降。在手指甲方面,我们发现从1982 - 1984年(n = 509;皮肤癣菌62%,酵母菌29%,NDFF 1%,混合感染7%)到1992 - 1994年(n = 348;皮肤癣菌45%,酵母菌52%,NDFF 0.3%,混合感染3%),感染病原体的变化更为明显。1992 - 1994年从手指甲分离出酵母菌的高比例(52%)令人瞩目。酵母菌分离株在甲癣发病机制中的作用仍有待阐明。区分定植和感染是必要的。口服抗真菌药物对皮肤癣菌性甲感染的有效性已有充分记录。然而,其对酵母菌和NDFF的有效性尚未得到充分研究,而且不同抗真菌药物的效果应该也不相同。为避免治疗失败,建议对甲癣中的感染病原体进行检测。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验