Abstract
Erysipelas is an acute bacterial infection of the dermis and hypodermis that is associated with clinical inflammation. It is a specific clinical type of cellulitis and, as such, it should be studied as a specific entity. Erysipelas is generally caused by group A streptococci; it is highly probable that streptococcal toxins also play a role, which could, in part, help explain the clinical inflammation.
Erysipelas of the leg is the main clinical type encountered. The face, arm, and upper thigh are the other most common sites for the occurrence of erysipelas. After a sudden onset, areas of erythema and edema characteristically enlarge with well-defined margins. Athlete’s foot is the most common portal of entry for the disease. Erysipelas is generally associated with high fever, and adenopathy and lymphangitis are sometimes present.
At the time of diagnosis, it is important to look for clinical markers of severity (local signs and symptoms, general signs and symptoms, co-morbidity, social context) which would necessitate hospitalization.
There are many differential diagnoses, particularly in the case of atypical dermo-hypodermitis. Some bacterial infections may have specific clinical aspects or may lead to a diagnosis of cellulitis. Necrotizing cellulitis or fasciitis are life-threatening diseases and a rapid diagnosis is important. Other noninfectious types of cellulitis have been reported in many diseases, both localized or generalized.
The biology of typical erysipelas is of little value in diagnosis and a laboratory workup is usually not required. There are few local complications associated with erysipelas; abscess can occur in some patients and septicemia is rare. Recurrence is the more distressing complication.
Treatment of patients with erysipelas has been evaluated in a small number of studies. In most of them, erysipelas has been included in therapeutic studies of ‘severe cutaneous infections’. This is not justified as in fact erysipelas is usually sensitive to penicillin G. Amoxicillin and macrolides are also effective. However, comparative, cost-analysis studies need to be performed to determine the best therapeutic option. Bed rest with the leg elevated is also important. Anticoagulants are indicated in patients at risk of venous thromboembolism. The portal of entry will also require treatment. Long-term antibacterial therapy is required for patients with recurrence.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Dupuy A. Epidémiologie descriptive et connaissance des facteurs de risque de l’érysipèle. Ann Dermatol Venereol 2001; 128: 312–316
Bernard P, Bédane C, Mounier M, et al. Dermohypodermites bactériennes de l’adulte. Incidence et place de l’étiologie streptococcique. Ann Dermatol Venereol 1995; 122: 495–500
Conférence de Consensus. Erysipèle et fasciite nécrosante: prise en charge. Ann Dermatol Venereol 2001; 128: 307–482
Denis F, Martin C, Ploy MC. L’érysipéle: données microbiologiques et pathogéniques. Ann Dermatol Venereol 2001; 128: 317–325
Vaillant L. Critères diagnostiques de l’érysipèle. Ann Dermatol Venereol 2001; 128: 326–333
Leyden JJ. Cellulitis. Arch Dermatol 1989; 125: 823–824
Norrby A, Eriksson B, Norgren M, et al. Virulence properties of erysipelas-associated group A streptococci. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1992; 11: 1136–1143
Schmitt JL. Enquête prospective. Erysipèle et cellulites nécrosantes: quelle prise en charge en milieu hospitalier. Ann Dermatol Venereol 2001; 128: 334–337
Duvanel T, Harms M. Erysipèle et cellulites infectieuses: classification, approche diagnostique, traitement. Rundschau Med 1987; 76: 216–219
Chartier C, Grosshans E. Erysipelas. Int J Dermatol 1990; 29: 459–467
Dupuy A, Benchiki H, Roujeau JC, et al. Risk factors for erysipelas of the leg (cellulitis): case control study. BMJ 1999; 318: 1591–1594
Hamar H, Sverdrup B, Borglund E, et al. Coagulation and fibrinolytic systems during the course of erysipelas and necrotizing fasciitis and the effect of heparin. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1985; 65: 495–503
Schultz-Ehrenburg U, Weindorf N, Tourbier H. Das nekrotisierende Erysipel: beziehungen zu angiologischen Grundkrankheiten. Z Hautkr 1982; 57: 1733–1744
Jorup-Rönström C, Britton S. Recurrent erysipelas: predisposing factors and costs of prophylaxis. Infection 1987; 15: 105–106
Bédane C. Dermo-hypodermites bactériennes aigües de l’adulte. Ann Dermatol Venereol 1997; 124: 57–60
Jorup-Rönstrom C, Britton S, Gavlevik A, et al. The course, costs and complication of oral versus intravenous therapy of erysipelas. Infection 1984; 12: 390–394
Bernard P, Plantin P, Roger H, et al. Roxithromycin versus penicillin in the treatment of erysipelas in adults: a comparative study. Br J Dermatol 1992; 127: 155–159
Tan JS, Wischnow RM, Talan DA, et al. Treatment of hospitalized patients with complicated skin and skin structure infections: double blind randomized, multicenter study of piperacillin-tazobactam versus ticarcillin-clavulanate. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1993; 37: 1580–1586
Daly JS, Worthington MJ, Andrews RJ, et al. Randomized, double blind trial of cefonicid and nafcillin in the treatment of skin and skin structures infections. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1990; 34: 654–656
Daniel R. Azithromycin, erythromycin and cloxacillin in the treatment of infections of the skin and asssociated soft tissues. J Int Med Res 1991; 19: 880–884
Kiani R. Double blind, double dummy comparison of azithromycin and cephalexin in the treatment of skin and skin structures infections. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis 1991; 10: 880–884
Heskel NS, Spieman N, Pichotta PJ, et al. Erythromycin versus cefadroxil in the treatment of skin infections. Int J Dermatol 1992; 31: 131–133
Nelder KH. Double blind randomized study of oral temafloxacin and cefadroxil in patients with mild to moderately severe bacterial skin infections. Am J Med 1991; 91: 111S–114S
Gentry LO, Ramirez-Ronda CH, Rodriguez-Norida E, et al. Oral ciprofloxacin vs parenteral cefotaxime in the treatment of difficult skin and skin structure infections. Arch Intern Med 1989; 149: 2579–2583
Parrish LC, Jungkind D. Systemic antimicrobial therapy in skin and skin structures infections: comparison of temafloxacin and ciprofloxacin. Am J Med 1991; 91: 115S–119S
Sjöblom AO, Eriksson B, Jorup-Rönstrom C, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis in recurrent erysipelas. Infection 1993; 6: 390–394
Bishara J, Golan-Cohen A, Robenshtok E, et al. Antibiotic use in patients with erysipelas: a retrospective study. Isr Med Assoc J 2001; 3: 722–724
Acknowledgements
The authors have provided no information on sources of funding or on conflicts of interest directly relevant to the content of this review.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Bonnetblanc, JM., Bédane, C. Erysipelas. Am J Clin Dermatol 4, 157–163 (2003). https://doi.org/10.2165/00128071-200304030-00002
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2165/00128071-200304030-00002