Exploring treatment and antifungal resistance in an outbreak of tinea caused by Microsporum audouinii

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundMicrosporum audouinii has resurged recently. Infections with the dermatophyte are difficult to treat, which raises the question if we treat M. audouinii infections with the most effective antifungal (AF) agent.ObjectivesThe aims of this study was to investigate an outbreak of tinea capitis (TC) in Denmark, address the challenges in outbreak management and to conduct two reviews regarding previous outbreaks and minimal inhibitory concentration (MIC).MethodsWe used Wood's light, culture, direct microscopy, and PCR for screening and antifungal susceptibility testing (AFST) for treatment optimization. We performed two reviews to explore M. audouinii outbreaks and MIC values using broth microdilution method.ResultsOf 73 screened individuals, 10 had confirmed M. audouinii infections. Clinical resistance to griseofulvin was observed in 4 (66%) cases. While previous outbreaks showed high griseofulvin efficacy, our study favoured terbinafine, fluconazole and itraconazole in our hard‐to‐treat cases. AFST guided the choice of AF. Through the literature search, we identified five M. audouinii outbreaks, where differences in management included the use of Wood's light and prophylactic topical AF therapy. Terbinafine MIC values from the literature ranged from 0.002 to 0.125 mg/L.ConclusionUse of Wood's light and preventive measurements were important for limiting infection. The literature lacked MIC data for griseofulvin against M. audouinii, but indicated sensitivity for terbinafine. The clinical efficacy for M. audouinii treatment was contradictory favouring both terbinafine and griseofulvin. AFST could have a key role in the treatment of difficult cases, but lack of standardisation of AFST and MIC breakpoints limits its usefulness.