본문바로가기

Severe Skin and Soft Tissue Infection of Patients Admitted to Intensive Care Units

Hye-Jin Ahn
10.17966/JMI.2024.29.3.92 Epub 2024 October 11

0
Cited By

Abstract

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) can occasionally progress to life-threatening conditions, such as septic shock, requiring intensive care unit admission. Their risk factors include diabetes mellitus, chronic renal failure, chronic vascular disease, malignancy, and acquired immune deficiency syndrome. However, early diagnosis is challenging due to initially benign skin lesions and the absence of systemic symptoms such as fever. This review focuses on severe bacterial infections such as necrotizing fasciitis, gas gangrene, and toxic shock syndrome, examining their etiology and management. These severe SSTIs should be understood for the early diagnosis, appropriate treatment, and improved patient outcomes. Dermatologists play a vital role in recognizing and managing these infections.



Keywords



Gas gangrene Necrotizing fasciitis Skin and soft tissue infections Toxic shock syndrome



INTRODUCTION

Skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) can occasionally be severe to cause septic shock, necessitating intensive care unit admission. The Extended Prevalence of Infection in Intensive Care (EPIC II) study reported that the respiratory tract was the most common site of infection, accounting for 64% of infections, followed by the abdomen (20%), bloodstream (15%), renal tract/genitourinary system (14%), and skin (6.6%)1. Another study reported that following the respira- tory tract (62.9%) and abdominal infections (25.3%), SSTIs (8.7%) are the third most frequent cause of septic shock2. A previous study reported 1,250 episodes of SSTIs of patients admitted to the hospital via emergency departments, and 3.3% had septic syndrome3. Given the high mortality and morbidity rates associated with SSTIs, understanding the causes and risk factors of these infections is important for delivering quality healthcare. Risk factors of severe SSTIs include diabetes mellitus, chronic renal failure, chronic vascular disease, malignancy, and acquired immune deficiency syndrome. Diagnosing the disease at its early stages is challenging because of initially benign skin lesions and the absence of hemodynamic instability4. The typical onset of SSTIs is sudden over several days, and they are most commonly caused by bacteria5. This study aimed to review severe bacterial infections, including necrotizing fasciitis (NF), gas gangrene (GG), and toxic shock syndrome (TSS), and to evaluate the etiology and management of severe SSTIs.

SEVERE SKIN AND SOFT TISSUE INFECTIONS

1. Necrotizing fasciitis

NF refers to skin, subcutaneous tissue, and muscle fascial infections, characterized by necrosis in these structures4. In the vast majority of cases, NF begins with the inoculation of pathogens through skin injuries caused by trauma, perforating wounds, human or animal bites, insect bites, minor procedures, catheter insertion, medication or illicit drug injection, post-varicella complications, and other factors, including contusions without skin breakage6.

1) Clinical manifestations

NF most commonly develops in the lower limbs; however, it can also affect the upper limbs, trunk, head, and neck. The initial lesion might present mild erythema, which becomes widespread within 24 to 72 h. The deeper the lesion, the darker the skin and becomes a dusky and later purplish color, and consequently, blisters form. Bacteremia is frequently present, and metastatic infections may occur. With the onset of bruising and blisters, tissue destruction is severe, with apparent signs of systemic toxicity and organ failure7. Since cutaneous manifestations are not initially detected, the infection is often misdiagnosed, or the correct diagnosis is delayed, resulting in a mortality rate of >70%8.

2) Microbial classification

Microbial classification is widely used to classify NF classification: type I is characterized by the disease caused by a synergistic association between aerobic and anaerobic bacteria, type II is caused mainly by group A beta-hemolytic streptococci (GAS), type III is caused by gram-negative rods including Aeromonas and Vibrio spp., and type IV is rarely reported but caused by fungal infection. NF type I is generally observed in the elderly or those with underlying illnesses. Unlike type I infections, type II NF may occur in any age group and persons without any underlying disease. However, recent reports of monomicrobial NF caused by Enterobacteriales, mainly occurring in immunocompromised patients, with higher mortality than in type 1 and 2 NF, suggested that this classification be reconsidered9. Type I infection is commonly associated with gas in the tissue and thus is difficult to dis- tinguish from GG due to clostridial infection. Some studies reported that type II infections have accounted for 55 to 87% of all NF cases10,11. In contrast, type I infections have been more prevalent in other studies12, and some studies reported that the incidence of the two types of infection has been similar7,13,14. A recent meta-analysis (a total of 8,718 patients from 105 studies included) revealed a 53% and 37.9% pooled prevalence of polymicrobial and monomicrobial infections, respectively15.

3) Diagnosis

Diagnosing necrotizing soft tissue infection is challenging because its early signs might be similar to those of non-necrotizing soft tissue infections, such as erythema and edema. Moreover, fever occurred in only 40% of cases7. Nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea can be initial signs of toxemia caused by group A streptococcal infection, although these symptoms are frequently mistaken for food poisoning or a viral infection7.

(1) Imaging

Imaging should not delay urgent surgical exploration, particularly for patients in shock. In stable and equivocal cases, magnetic resonance imaging is the most effective method to diagnose NF in the limbs. It might provide valuable diagnostic clues when thickened fascia (>3 mm) with hypersignal on fat-suppressed T2-weighted sequences are seen16. Standard X-rays have poor sensitivity and can only detect NF with gas in the soft tissue at advanced stages. A computed tomography scan is of little diagnostic value for limb NF but should be performed for abdominoperineal or cervicofacial infections to detect the portal of entry and guide surgical management16.

(2) Laboratory investigations

The Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis (LRINEC) is calculated from serum C-reactive protein, leukocyte count, hemoglobin, sodium, creatinine, and glucose levels to differentiate necrotizing soft tissue infections from non-necrotizing ones and to predict patient outcomes17 (Table 1). However, the diagnostic performance of the LINEC score remains controversial.

Parameters

Values

Score (%)

Hb (g/dL)

>13.5

0

11~13.5

1

<11

2

Leukocytes (109/L)

<15

0

15~25

1

>25

2

Sodium (mmoL/L)

<135

2

Creatinine (moL/mL)

>1.41

2

Glucose

>100

1

C-reactive protein

>15

4

Adapted from Wong et al. (2004)17

The sum of scores <5, 50% risk (low risk); between 6 and 7, intermediate risk; >8, 75% risk (high risk)

Table 1. Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis [LRINEC]

(3) Microbiological diagnosis

Blood cultures, fine-needle aspiration in skin necrosis areas, and intraoperative deep tissue biopsy have been recommended by the Infectious Diseases Society of America for microbiological diagnosis, rather than superficial wound swabs, which are unreliable due to high contamination risk16,18. Blood cultures are positive in 11~60% of cases, whereas intraoperative tissue biopsies are positive in 80%. Fine-needle aspiration of the necrotic skin is a simple and quick procedure, yielding positive cultures in up to 73% of cases. Ultrasound-guided aspiration of the fluid along the fascia may also be helpful16.

2. Gas gangrene

Clostridial GG or clostridial myonecrosis is a rare but life-threatening necrotizing soft tissue infection caused by anaerobic, spore-forming, and gas-producing clostridium subspecies19. Clostridium perfringens is the most common etiological agent of GG5. Because it is anaerobic, it is usually preceded by deep penetrating injury and exposure to contaminated soil or water. The incubation period between the injury and the onset of symptoms is approximately 1~3 days but can be as short as hours5. Patients of clostridial GG have a significantly increased mortality risk of up to 100% due to early septic shock caused by clostridial toxins. Detecting clinical differences between NF and GG is difficult in the initial stages19. The combination of severe pain, disproportionate tachycardia relative to the fever, and crepitus is highly indicative of clostridial myonecrosis20.

1) Treatment of necrotizing fasciitis and gas gangrene

The antibiotic treatment should empirically cover poly- microbial NF, targeting gram-positive, gram-negative, and anaerobic bacteria, especially high-risk patients. Combined with antibacterial therapy, surgical debridement is also an essential emergency procedure6. Suspected cases of clostridial myonecrosis particularly require emergency surgical exploration and debridement of all involved muscles5. An intravenous broad-spectrum β-lactam should be used (e.g., piperacillin [4 g every 6 h] plus tazobactam [0.5 g every 6 h] or cefotaxime [2 g every 6 h]). Suspected methicillin-resistant S. aureus (MRSA) can be covered by the inclusion of vanco- mycin (30 mg/kg loading dose before 30 mg/kg per 24 h continuous infusion) or daptomycin (8~12 mg/kg every 24 h) or linezolid (600 mg every 12 h), whereas resistant gram-negative strains can be covered by the use of carbapenems (e.g., meropenem [1~2 g every 8 h]). Aminoglycosides genta- micin [5~8 mg/kg over 30 min every 24 h] or amikacin [25~ 30 mg/kg over 30 min every 24 h]) should be considered to further broaden the spectrum only in cases of septic shock16,18. Clindamycin should be administered in cases of clostridial myonecrosis or GAS infection. Clindamycin inhibits the synthesis of clostridial exotoxins, lessens their systemic effects19, and reduces streptococcal toxin production and disease severity with improved bacterial clearance16. For other NF type III infections, current guidelines recommend that A. hydrophila infections be treated with doxycycline plus either ciprofloxacin or ceftriaxone18. A combination of doxycycline plus either ceftriaxone or cefotaxime is recommended for V. vulnificus infections18.

TOXIC SHOCK SYNDROME

TSS is an acute, multisystem, toxin-mediated illness, typically resulting in shock and multiorgan failure early in its clinical course. Its annual incidence suggested to range from 1.5 to 11 per 100,000 people21. It is caused by toxin-producing strains S. aureus and S. pyogenes22. Bacterial toxins, known as superantigens, are protein toxins that trigger excessive and unconventional T-cell activation. This activation results in the downstream activation of other cell types and the release of cytokines and chemokines, resulting in a cytokine storm, hypotension, and disseminated intravascular coagulation22. However, not all patients colonized or infected with a toxin-producing strain of S. aureus or S. pyogenes develop TSS. The response to the bacterial and toxic challenges may largely depend on the interaction between the host immune system and the pathogen22. The absence of antibodies to superantigens seems to be a significant risk factor for TSS development23. Host genetic factors, such as MHC class II haplotype, may influence the intensity of the inflammatory response24.

1. Staphylococcal toxic shock syndrome

Staphylococcal TSS typically begins suddenly, resembling the onset of influenza, with fever, gastrointestinal distress, and severe muscle pain. The source of the infection is often superficial, including complicated burns or surgical wounds or stem from a foreign object22. Desquamation is a char- acteristic late characteristic of staphylococcal TSS, occurring 10~21 days after the disease onset22. Postoperative TSS occurs within 10 days, and in many cases, clinically significant surgical site infection is lacking at the time of presentation25. Notably, blood cultures test positive in <5% of staphylococcal TSS cases22.

2. Streptococcal toxic shock syndrome

Streptococcal TSS more commonly occurs due to deep-seated invasive soft tissue infections such as NF, cellulitis, and myositis22. An influenza-like illness also commonly occurs at the early stages characterized by fever, sore throat, swollen lymph nodes, and gastrointestinal distress22. About 60% of patients with streptococcal TSS have positive blood cul- tures26. The mortality rate associated with streptococcal TSS is significantly higher than that of staphylococcal TSS, with incidence as high as 80% when associated with myositis27.

3. Diagnosis

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) establishes several criteria for diagnosing TSS, though specific components differ between streptococcal and staphylococcus TSS21,22,28 (Table 2).

Staphylococcal TSS

Streptococcal TSS

Clinical criteria

1. Fever 38.9.

2. Rashdiffuse macular erythroderma.

3. Desquamation1~2 weeks after the onset of the illness, particularly on palms and soles.

4. Hypotensionsystolic blood pressure 90 mm Hg for
adults or <5th percentile for children aged <16 years.

5. Multisystem involvementat least three of the following:

a. Gastrointestinalvomiting or diarrhea

b. Muscularsevere myalgia or elevated creatine
phosphokinase twice the upper limit of normal

c. Mucous membraneshyperemia of any mucosal surface

d. Renalblood urea nitrogen or creatinine twice the
upper normal limit

e. Hepatictotal bilirubin twice-upper normal limit

f.  Hematologicalplatelets 100,000/mm3

g. Central nervous system disorientation, combativeness,
or alterations in consciousness without focal
neurological signs



1. Hypotensionsystolic blood pressure 90 mm Hg
in adults or <the fifth percentile by age for children
aged <16 years.

2. Two or more of the following signs:

a. Renal impairment: Creatinine greater than or equal to 2 mg/dL (>177 μmol/L) for adults or greater than or equal to twice the upper limit to normal age. In the presence of a preexisting renal disease, greater than twofold elevation over the baseline level

b. Coagulopathyplatelets of 100,000/mm3 or disseminated intravascular coagulation

c. Hepatic involvement: Alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, or total bilirubin twice the upper normal limit. In the presence preexisting liver disease, greater than twofold increase over
the baseline level

d. ARDS

e. Generalized, erythematous, macular rash that
may desquamate

f.  Soft tissue necrosis, including necrotizing fasciitis,
myositis, or gangrene.

Laboratory criteria

Negative results on the following tests:

a. Blood, throat, or CSF (blood culture may be positive
for S. aureus)

b. Rise in titer to Rocky Mountain spotted fever,
leptospirosis, or measles.

Isolation of group A β-hemolytic streptococci:

a. From a normally sterile site (blood, CSF, joint, pericardial, pleural, peritoneal fluid, tissue biopsy);

b. From a nonsterile site (throat, vagina, sputum).

Case classification

- Probable TSS: a case that meets four of the five clinical
and laboratory criteria.

- Confirmed TSS: a case that meets all five clinical
(including desquamation) and laboratory criteria.



Case classification

- Probable TTS: a case which fulfills clinical case definition and isolation of group A β-hemolytic streptococci from
a normally nonsterile site in the absence of other
etiologies for the illness.

- Definite TSS: a case that fulfills clinical case definition
and isolation of group A
β-hemolytic streptococci
from a normally sterile site.

TSS: toxic shock syndrome; CSF: cerebrospinal fluid; ARDS: adult respiratory distress syndrome

Table 2. Diagnostic criteria for staphylococcal and streptococcal TSS according to CDC recommendations

4. Treatment

Patients should receive intensive care and resuscitation. With unknown causative organisms, empirical antibiotic therapy should target gram-positive cocci, including traditionally penicillinase-resistant penicillin (e.g., oxacillin, nafcillin) or a first-generation cephalosporin21. However, with the increasing occurrence of methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus, vancomycin or linezolid is advised for the initial treatment, depending on the local prevalence21. GAS remains exquisitely sensitive to β-lactam agents, including penicillin G, an agent often considered one of the first-line therapies22. Regarding NF-associated TSS, infection is mostly polymicrobial, and broad-spectrum beta-lactam therapy such as piperacillin plus tazobactam should be administered28.

CONCLUSIONS

The diseases discussed here and others should be under- stood and considered as a differential diagnosis, Dermato- logists play a crucial role in the suspicion, early diagnosis, and treatment or referral of potentially severe or fatal SSTIs.



References


1. Vincent JL, Rello J, Marshall J, Silva E, Anzueto A, Martin CD, et al. EPIC II Group of Investigators. International study of the prevalence and outcomes of infection in intensive care units. JAMA 2009;302:2323-2329
Google Scholar 

2. Engel C, Brunkhorst FM, Bone HG, Brunkhorst R, Gerlach H, Grond S, et al. Epidemiology of sepsis in Germany: results from a national prospective multicenter study. Intensive Care Med 2007;33:606-618
Google Scholar 

3. Llopis F, Gonzalez-Castillo J, Julian-Jimenez A, Ferre C, Gamazo-Río JJ, Martinez M. Review of 1.250 episodes of skin and soft tissue infections attended at 49 hospital emergency departments. Rev Esp Quimioter 2014;27: 115-121
Google Scholar 

4. Peetermans M, de Prost N, Eckmann C, Norrby-Teglund A, Skrede S, De Waele JJ. Necrotizing skin and soft-tissue infections in the intensive care unit. Clin Microbiol Infect 2020;26:8-17
Google Scholar 

5. Vinh DC, Embil JM. Rapidly progressive soft tissue in- fections. Lancet Infect Dis 2005;5:501-513
Google Scholar 

6. Marques SA, Abbade LPF. Severe bacterial skin infections. An Bras Dermatol 2020;95:407-417
Google Scholar 

7. Stevens DL, Bryant AE. Necrotizing soft-tissue infections. N Engl J Med 2017;377:2253-2265
Google Scholar 

8. Adams EM, Gudmundsson S, Yocum DE, Haselby RC, Craig WA, Sundstrom WR. Streptococcal myositis. Arch Intern Med 1985;145:1020-1023
Google Scholar 

9. Kuehl R, Tschudin-Sutter S, Siegemund M, Marsch S, Battegay M, Wetterauer C, et al. High mortality of non-Fournier necrotizing fasciitis with Enterobacteriales: time to rethink classification? Clin Infect Dis 2019;69:147-150
Google Scholar 

10. Jabbour G, El-Menyar A, Peralta R, Shaikh N, Abdelrahman H, Mudali IN, et al. Pattern and predictors of mortality in necrotizing fasciitis patients in a single tertiary hospital. World J Emerg Surg 2016;11:40
Google Scholar 

11. Nordqvist G, Walldén A, Brorson H, Tham J. Ten years of treating necrotizing fasciitis. Infect Dis (Lond) 2015;47: 319-325
Google Scholar 

12. van Stigt SF, de Vries J, Bijker JB, Mollen RM, Hekma EJ, Lemson SM, et al. Review of 58 patients with necrotizing fasciitis in the Netherlands. World J Emerg Surg 2016; 11:21
Google Scholar 

13. Kulasegaran S, Cribb B, Vandal AC, McBride S, Holland D, MacCormick AD. Necrotizing fasciitis: 11-year retrospective case review in South Auckland. ANZ J Surg 2016;86: 826-830
Google Scholar 

14. Wong CH, Chang HC, Pasupathy S, Khin LW, Tan JL, Low CO. Necrotizing fasciitis: clinical presentation, microbiology, and determinants of mortality. J Bone Joint Surg Am 2003;85:1454-1460
Google Scholar 

15. Dhanasekara CS, Marschke B, Morris E, Kahathuduwa CN, Dissanaike S. Global patterns of necrotizing soft tissue infections: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Surgery 2021;170:1718-1726
Google Scholar 

16. Hua C, Urbina T, Bosc R, Parks T, Sriskandan S, de Prost N, et al. Necrotising soft-tissue infections. Lancet Infect Dis 2023;23:e81-e94
Google Scholar 

17. Wong CH, Khin LW, Heng KS, Tan KC, Low CO. The LRINEC (Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis) score: a tool for distinguishing necrotizing fasciitis from other soft tissue infections. Crit Care Med 2004;32: 1535-1541
Google Scholar 

18. Stevens DL, Bisno AL, Chambers HF, Dellinger EP, Goldstein EJ, Gorbach SL, et al. Practice guidelines for the diagnosis and management of skin and soft tissue infections: 2014 update by the Infectious Diseases Society of America. Clin Infect Dis 2014;59:e10-e52
Google Scholar 

19. Leiblein M, Wagner N, Adam EH, Frank J, Marzi I, Nau C. Clostridial gas gangrene-a rare but deadly infection: case series and comparison to other necrotizing soft tissue infections. Orthop Surg 2020;12:1733-1747
Google Scholar 

20. Chapnick EK, Abter EI. Necrotizing soft-tissue infections. Infect Dis Clin North Am 1996;10:835-855
Google Scholar 

21. Gottlieb M, Long B, Koyfman A. The evaluation and management of toxic shock syndrome in the emergency department: a review of the literature. J Emerg Med 2018;54:807-814
Google Scholar 

22. Lappin E, Ferguson AJ. Gram-positive toxic shock syn- dromes. Lancet Infect Dis 2009;9:281-290
Google Scholar 

23. Matsushima A, Kuroki Y, Nakajima S, Sakai T, Kojima H, Ueyama M. Low level of TSST-1 antibody in burn patients with toxic shock syndrome caused by methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. J Burn Care Res 2015;36:e120-e124
Google Scholar 

24. Kotb M, Norrby-Teglund A, McGeer A, Green K, Low DE. Association of human leukocyte antigen with outcomes of infectious diseases: the streptococcal experience. Scand J Infect Dis 2003;35:665-669
Google Scholar 

25. Celie KB, Colen DL, Kovach SJ 3rd. Toxic shock syndrome after surgery: case presentation and systematic review of the literature. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open 2020;8: e2499
Google Scholar 

26. Stevens D. Streptococcal toxic shock syndrome. Clin Microbiol Infect 2002;8:133-136
Google Scholar 

27. McCormick JK, Yarwood JM, Schlievert PM. Toxic shock syndrome and bacterial superantigens: an update. Annu Rev Microbiol 2001;55:77-104
Google Scholar 

28. Atchade E, De Tymowski C, Grall N, Tanaka S, Montravers P. Toxic shock syndrome: a literature review. Antibiotics (Basel) 2024;13:96
Google Scholar 

Congratulatory MessageClick here!

Download this article