title: Treatment of mucosal leishmaniasis in Latin America: systematic review.
abstract: Mucosal leishmaniasis (ML) is an important endemic disease and public-health problem in underdeveloped countries because of its significant morbidity and mortality. Increases in ecological tourism have extended this problem to developed countries. This form of leishmaniasis, caused by reactivation after primary cutaneous lesion, has a natural history of progressive destruction of the nasal septa and soft and hard palates, causing facial disfiguration and leading to respiratory disturbances. Treatment of ML, based on several therapies, depends on use of toxic compounds, and few drugs have emerged over the past 40 years. Drug resistance has increased, and the cure rate is no better than 70% in the largest studies. Despite these data, there has been no systematic review of therapies used to treat this important tropical disease. The aim of this study is to determine the best drug management for treatment of ML in Latin America based on the best studies offered by the medical literature. The MEDLINE, LILACS, EMBASE, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify articles related to ML and therapy. The studies were independently selected by 2 authors. Articles with sufficient data for cure and treatment failures, internal and external validity information, and > 4 patients in each treatment were included. Validation of this systematic review was based on guidelines to guarantee quality; 22 articles met our inclusion criteria. Stibogluconate achieved a 51% cure rate (76/150 patients), and 88% of patients treated with meglumine were cured (121 patients). Pentamidine and amphotericin were as effective as meglumine. Use of itraconazole and other therapies (pentoxifylline, allopurinol, or interferon-gamma) was controversial, and numbers of patients in some studies were insufficient for statistical analysis. Meglumine may be the drug of choice in the treatment of ML, as it offers similar cure rates when compared with amphotericin B and pentamidine. Cost, adverse effects, local experience, and availability of drugs to treat ML are strong points to be considered before determining the best management of this disease, especially in developing countries.
authors: Infectious and Parasitic Clinic, Hospital das Clínicas, University of São Paulo School of Medicine, São Paulo, Brazil. valdirsa@netpoint.com.br
authors: Valdir Sabbaga
authors: VS
authors: Amato
authors: Felipe Francisco
authors: FF
authors: Tuon
authors: Andre Machado
authors: AM
authors: Siqueira
authors: Antonio Carlos
authors: AC
authors: Nicodemo
authors: Vicente Amato
authors: VA
authors: Neto
mesh_terms: D000666:Amphotericin B / Q000627:therapeutic use; D000818:Animals; D000967:Antimony Sodium Gluconate / Q000627:therapeutic use; D000981:Antiprotozoal Agents / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D006801:Humans; D017964:Itraconazole / Q000627:therapeutic use; D007843:Latin America; D007891:Leishmania / Q000254:growth & development*; D007897:Leishmaniasis, Mucocutaneous / Q000188:drug therapy* / Q000469:parasitology; D008536:Meglumine / Q000627:therapeutic use; D010303:Paromomycin / Q000627:therapeutic use; D010419:Pentamidine / Q000627:therapeutic use
chemical_list: D000981:Antiprotozoal Agents; D017964:Itraconazole; D010303:Paromomycin; D010419:Pentamidine; D008536:Meglumine; D000666:Amphotericin B; D000967:Antimony Sodium Gluconate