User login
Managing Cutaneous Reactions to Yellow Fly (Diachlorus ferrugatus) Bites
Managing Cutaneous Reactions to Yellow Fly (Diachlorus ferrugatus) Bites
The yellow fly (Diachlorus ferrugatus) is a flying biting insect belonging to the order Diptera, family Tabanidae, which also includes deer flies (genus Chrysops) and horse flies (genus Tabanus).1 They are different from stinging insects of the order Hymenoptera (bees, wasps, yellow jackets, and hornets). As the name suggests, the yellow fly has a distinct yellow appearance, and adult yellow flies have a body length of approximately 1 cm.1,2 Distinguishing features of the yellow fly include prominently dark forelegs (the remaining legs are yellow), dark purple to black eyes with 2 fluorescent green lines, and a yellow abdomen with black hairs along the lateral regions and a broad central yellow stripe.1-3 Their wings have longitudinal black veins with clear spaces in between and a conspicuous brown patch at the apex (Figure 1A). In comparison, horse flies are darker and larger (Figure 1B), and deer flies are similar in shape but have stripes on the abdomen and thorax and mottled wings with dark patches near the apex (Figure 1C).1

The Tabanidae family comprises 4455 species belonging to 137 genera and is notorious for bites that result in localized pain, swelling, itching, and discomfort.4 While some Tabanidae species are mechanical or biologic vectors of pathogens (eg, Loa loa, equine infectious anemia virus, Trypanosoma species, cattle and sheep anthrax and tularemia), yellow flies do not appear to play a considerable role in disease transmission.4,5 Nonetheless, their bites can cause discomfort and create a nuisance for individuals residing within their distribution areas as well as for agricultural livestock, contributing to lower weight gain and milk production.1
Yellow flies are a commonly occurring species in the southeastern United States; their distribution spans several states, including New Jersey, Florida, and Texas.1,2 In Florida, specifically, yellow flies exhibit a seasonal pattern, with peak activity typically occurring from April through June.6-9 Activity levels are heightened around sunset as well as sunrise.1,9 Tabanids can be found in forests, parks, and gardens—particularly those that contain waterways such as freshwater lakes and streams—and typically stay near shaded woodlands that are prone to flooding.9
Tabanids go through the life cycle stages of egg, larva, pupa, and adult; the life cycle typically spans 1 year, with the adults living 30 to 60 days.1 Mating occurs soon after adults emerge from the pupal case in the soil.1,10 Females then are attracted to large dark moving objects and will feed on blood to develop eggs.2,10 Only female members of the Tabanidae family have modifications of the mouth parts that allow wounding of the skin (Figure 2). Their bites introduce saliva to the skin containing anticoagulants and other likely allergens. The tongue is used to lap between 20 to 600 microliters of blood.11 Males feed primarily on pollen and nectar.10 Most tabanid bites result in transient wheal-and-flare reactions, but some can result in more severe allergic reactions such as in our reported case.10 Rarely, anaphylactic reactions have been documented.10,12

Case Report
A 48-year-old man presented with swelling of the left hand following a yellow fly bite to the wrist 30 minutes prior while he worked outside at a ranch in central Florida (Figure 3). The patient was afebrile and reported no respiratory or gastrointestinal symptoms. The left hand and forearm were warm to the touch and appeared red and edematous (Figure 4). He was not tachycardic and did not appear to be in any distress. The patient reported that he had worked on the ranch for several years, and during that time had noted he was developing worsening localized reactions to yellow fly bites. He had visually identified the offending insect prior to the current presentation and had trapped some flies in previous incidents. Recently he had experienced rapid swelling at the bite sites but had never experienced respiratory difficulties or signs of systemic allergic reactions. He previously had used topical steroids when bites resulted in mild wheal-and-flare reactions, but he reported that these were no longer effective.


Management of the current bite reaction included oral prednisone tapered over 1 week from 40 mg to 10 mg daily as well as oral cetirizine 10 mg daily. Although bacterial cellulitis was considered in the differential diagnosis, no oral antibiotics were prescribed given the patient’s history of similar clinical presentations following yellow fly bites. His symptoms resolved within a few hours of his dose of prednisone. Incidentally, our patient has been able to control the progression of subsequent hypersensitivity reactions to yellow fly bites with a single 20-mg dose of prednisone administered at the onset of the bite.
Comment
In general, blood-feeding (hematophagous) insects rarely cause anaphylaxis and are more likely to cause cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions, possibly due to the small amount of antigen injected from a bite.13,14 The immediate wheal-and-flare reaction is an IgE-mediated type 1 immune reaction compared to a less common type 4 T-cell mediated delayed hypersensitivity reaction.14,15 There are many protein allergens in the saliva of biting insects that are not well characterized. Relevant allergens include a 69 kDa salivary gland protein as well as a Tab y 1 (anticoagulant), Tab y 2 (hyaluronidase), and Tab y 5 (antigen 5–related venom protein).11,15-17 Some of these proteins have structural homology between insects of different orders and can cause cross-reactivity in patients who also are allergic to Hymenoptera stings (wasp-horsefly syndrome).12,16
Our patient’s cutaneous reaction was localized and clinically manifested with rapidly progressive erythema and edema at the bite location. He did not exhibit signs of a systemic reaction such as angioedema, respiratory or gastrointestinal symptoms, tachycardia, or hypotension. Management of affected patients depends on the extent of the reaction and may include oral or parenteral antihistamines as well as oral steroids for more severe edema.11 Anaphylactic reactions generally respond to subcutaneous epinephrine.15 It would be prudent for patients with a relevant anaphylactic history to carry an autoinjectable epinephrine pen in case of difficulty breathing or general malaise following a bite. Besides avoidance of insect bites, personal protection methods include wearing long-sleeved shirts and pants and using insect repellents containing diethyl toluamide (DEET), citronella, or geraniol.1
At present, diagnosis of cutaneous reactions to yellow fly bites is best made based on the patient’s personal history.14 If the offending fly is trapped, it can be identified. As most patients cannot differentiate between insects, it may be helpful for dermatologists to know that a small amount of blood at the bite site is suggestive of a fly bite rather than a sting from a member of the order Hymenoptera. Currently, there are no consistently useful extracts for intradermal skin testing.11 Although there are several commercially available serum-specific IgE tests for suspected horse fly reactions, their usefulness is doubtful without further information on sensitivity and specificity as well as the allergen utilized.11,18,19 The use of allergen immunotherapy to induce hyposensitization in patients who experience cutaneous reactions is not standardized and poses some risks including severe allergic reactions requiring facilities for resuscitation, variability of response patterns, and supporting evidence is weak.11
Final Thoughts
Cutaneous reactions to yellow fly bites rarely are described in the dermatology literature. The salivary proteins implicated in inducing an allergic response and cross-reactivity of D ferrugatus with other biting and stinging insects as well as the natural course of immune reactions over time need to be further characterized.
- Squitier JM. Deer flies, yellow flies, and horse flies, Chrysops, Diachlorus and Tabanus spp. (Insecta: Diptera: Tabanidae). University of Florida. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/IN155
- Fairchild GB, Weems HB Jr, Fasulo TR. Yellow fly, Diachlorus ferrugatus (Fabricius)(Insecta: Diptera: Tabanidae). University of Florida. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/IN595
- Mullens BA. Horse flies and deer flies (Tabanidae). In: Mullen G, Durden L. Med Vet Entomol. Elsevier Science; 2009:327-344.
- Akhoundi M, Sereno D, Marteau A, et al. Who bites me? A tentative discriminative key to diagnose hematophagous ectoparasites biting using clinical manifestations. Diagnostics (Basel). 2020;10:308.
- Cheng TC. General Parasitology. 2nd ed. Elsevier Science; 2021:660.
- Wells K, Varnadoe C, Dorman D, et al. Survey of the distribution and seasonal activity of yellow flies (Diptera: Tabanidae) in Florida, USA. J Vector Ecol. 2019;44:235-242.
- Hribar LJ, Leppla NC, Beshear RJ, et al. Seasonal abundance of Diachlorus ferrugatus (Diptera: Tabanidae) in Monroe County, Florida. Florida Scientist. 2003;66:52-54.
- Fairchild GB, Weems HV. Diachlorus ferrugatus (Fabricius), a fierce biting fly (Diptera: Tabanidae). Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry. Entomology Circular. 1973;139.
- Cilek JE, Schreiber ET. Diel host-seeking activity of adult Diachlorus ferrugatus (F.) (Diptera: Tabanidae) in Northwestern Florida. J Entomol Sci. 1999;34:462-466.
- Sean S. Tabanids (horseflies). Dermatol Online J. 1999;5:6.
- Whyte AF, Popeseu FD, Carlson J. Tabanidae insect (horsefly and deerfly) allergy in humans: a review of the literature. Clin Exp Allergy. 2020;50:886-893.
- Buonomo A, Rizzi A, Aruanno A, et al. Anaphylaxis after horsefly sting: a strange case of wasp-horsefly syndrome. Postepi Dermatol Alergol. 2021;2:331-332.
- Freye HB, Litwin C. Coexistent anaphylaxis to Diptera and Hymenoptera. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1996 76:270-272.
- Hemmer W, Wantke F. Insect hypersensitivity beyond bee and wasp venom allergy. Allergol Select. 2020;4:97-104.
- Ewan PW. Allergy to insect stings: a review. J R Soc Med. 1985;78:234-239.
- Ma D, Li Y, Dong J, et al. Purification and characterization of two new allergens from the salivary glands of the horsefly Tabanus yao. Allergy. 2011;66:101-109.
- Hemmer W, Focke M, Vieluf D, et al. Anaphylaxis induced by horsefly bites: identification of a 69 kd IgE-binding protein from Chrysops spp. (Diptera: Tabanidae) by western blot analysis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1998;101:134-136.
- Mayo Clinic Laboratories. Test catalog: horse fly. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://www.mayocliniclabs.com/search?q=horse%20fly
- HealthLabs.com. Horsefly allergy test. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://www.healthlabs.com/horsefly-allergy-testing
The yellow fly (Diachlorus ferrugatus) is a flying biting insect belonging to the order Diptera, family Tabanidae, which also includes deer flies (genus Chrysops) and horse flies (genus Tabanus).1 They are different from stinging insects of the order Hymenoptera (bees, wasps, yellow jackets, and hornets). As the name suggests, the yellow fly has a distinct yellow appearance, and adult yellow flies have a body length of approximately 1 cm.1,2 Distinguishing features of the yellow fly include prominently dark forelegs (the remaining legs are yellow), dark purple to black eyes with 2 fluorescent green lines, and a yellow abdomen with black hairs along the lateral regions and a broad central yellow stripe.1-3 Their wings have longitudinal black veins with clear spaces in between and a conspicuous brown patch at the apex (Figure 1A). In comparison, horse flies are darker and larger (Figure 1B), and deer flies are similar in shape but have stripes on the abdomen and thorax and mottled wings with dark patches near the apex (Figure 1C).1

The Tabanidae family comprises 4455 species belonging to 137 genera and is notorious for bites that result in localized pain, swelling, itching, and discomfort.4 While some Tabanidae species are mechanical or biologic vectors of pathogens (eg, Loa loa, equine infectious anemia virus, Trypanosoma species, cattle and sheep anthrax and tularemia), yellow flies do not appear to play a considerable role in disease transmission.4,5 Nonetheless, their bites can cause discomfort and create a nuisance for individuals residing within their distribution areas as well as for agricultural livestock, contributing to lower weight gain and milk production.1
Yellow flies are a commonly occurring species in the southeastern United States; their distribution spans several states, including New Jersey, Florida, and Texas.1,2 In Florida, specifically, yellow flies exhibit a seasonal pattern, with peak activity typically occurring from April through June.6-9 Activity levels are heightened around sunset as well as sunrise.1,9 Tabanids can be found in forests, parks, and gardens—particularly those that contain waterways such as freshwater lakes and streams—and typically stay near shaded woodlands that are prone to flooding.9
Tabanids go through the life cycle stages of egg, larva, pupa, and adult; the life cycle typically spans 1 year, with the adults living 30 to 60 days.1 Mating occurs soon after adults emerge from the pupal case in the soil.1,10 Females then are attracted to large dark moving objects and will feed on blood to develop eggs.2,10 Only female members of the Tabanidae family have modifications of the mouth parts that allow wounding of the skin (Figure 2). Their bites introduce saliva to the skin containing anticoagulants and other likely allergens. The tongue is used to lap between 20 to 600 microliters of blood.11 Males feed primarily on pollen and nectar.10 Most tabanid bites result in transient wheal-and-flare reactions, but some can result in more severe allergic reactions such as in our reported case.10 Rarely, anaphylactic reactions have been documented.10,12

Case Report
A 48-year-old man presented with swelling of the left hand following a yellow fly bite to the wrist 30 minutes prior while he worked outside at a ranch in central Florida (Figure 3). The patient was afebrile and reported no respiratory or gastrointestinal symptoms. The left hand and forearm were warm to the touch and appeared red and edematous (Figure 4). He was not tachycardic and did not appear to be in any distress. The patient reported that he had worked on the ranch for several years, and during that time had noted he was developing worsening localized reactions to yellow fly bites. He had visually identified the offending insect prior to the current presentation and had trapped some flies in previous incidents. Recently he had experienced rapid swelling at the bite sites but had never experienced respiratory difficulties or signs of systemic allergic reactions. He previously had used topical steroids when bites resulted in mild wheal-and-flare reactions, but he reported that these were no longer effective.


Management of the current bite reaction included oral prednisone tapered over 1 week from 40 mg to 10 mg daily as well as oral cetirizine 10 mg daily. Although bacterial cellulitis was considered in the differential diagnosis, no oral antibiotics were prescribed given the patient’s history of similar clinical presentations following yellow fly bites. His symptoms resolved within a few hours of his dose of prednisone. Incidentally, our patient has been able to control the progression of subsequent hypersensitivity reactions to yellow fly bites with a single 20-mg dose of prednisone administered at the onset of the bite.
Comment
In general, blood-feeding (hematophagous) insects rarely cause anaphylaxis and are more likely to cause cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions, possibly due to the small amount of antigen injected from a bite.13,14 The immediate wheal-and-flare reaction is an IgE-mediated type 1 immune reaction compared to a less common type 4 T-cell mediated delayed hypersensitivity reaction.14,15 There are many protein allergens in the saliva of biting insects that are not well characterized. Relevant allergens include a 69 kDa salivary gland protein as well as a Tab y 1 (anticoagulant), Tab y 2 (hyaluronidase), and Tab y 5 (antigen 5–related venom protein).11,15-17 Some of these proteins have structural homology between insects of different orders and can cause cross-reactivity in patients who also are allergic to Hymenoptera stings (wasp-horsefly syndrome).12,16
Our patient’s cutaneous reaction was localized and clinically manifested with rapidly progressive erythema and edema at the bite location. He did not exhibit signs of a systemic reaction such as angioedema, respiratory or gastrointestinal symptoms, tachycardia, or hypotension. Management of affected patients depends on the extent of the reaction and may include oral or parenteral antihistamines as well as oral steroids for more severe edema.11 Anaphylactic reactions generally respond to subcutaneous epinephrine.15 It would be prudent for patients with a relevant anaphylactic history to carry an autoinjectable epinephrine pen in case of difficulty breathing or general malaise following a bite. Besides avoidance of insect bites, personal protection methods include wearing long-sleeved shirts and pants and using insect repellents containing diethyl toluamide (DEET), citronella, or geraniol.1
At present, diagnosis of cutaneous reactions to yellow fly bites is best made based on the patient’s personal history.14 If the offending fly is trapped, it can be identified. As most patients cannot differentiate between insects, it may be helpful for dermatologists to know that a small amount of blood at the bite site is suggestive of a fly bite rather than a sting from a member of the order Hymenoptera. Currently, there are no consistently useful extracts for intradermal skin testing.11 Although there are several commercially available serum-specific IgE tests for suspected horse fly reactions, their usefulness is doubtful without further information on sensitivity and specificity as well as the allergen utilized.11,18,19 The use of allergen immunotherapy to induce hyposensitization in patients who experience cutaneous reactions is not standardized and poses some risks including severe allergic reactions requiring facilities for resuscitation, variability of response patterns, and supporting evidence is weak.11
Final Thoughts
Cutaneous reactions to yellow fly bites rarely are described in the dermatology literature. The salivary proteins implicated in inducing an allergic response and cross-reactivity of D ferrugatus with other biting and stinging insects as well as the natural course of immune reactions over time need to be further characterized.
The yellow fly (Diachlorus ferrugatus) is a flying biting insect belonging to the order Diptera, family Tabanidae, which also includes deer flies (genus Chrysops) and horse flies (genus Tabanus).1 They are different from stinging insects of the order Hymenoptera (bees, wasps, yellow jackets, and hornets). As the name suggests, the yellow fly has a distinct yellow appearance, and adult yellow flies have a body length of approximately 1 cm.1,2 Distinguishing features of the yellow fly include prominently dark forelegs (the remaining legs are yellow), dark purple to black eyes with 2 fluorescent green lines, and a yellow abdomen with black hairs along the lateral regions and a broad central yellow stripe.1-3 Their wings have longitudinal black veins with clear spaces in between and a conspicuous brown patch at the apex (Figure 1A). In comparison, horse flies are darker and larger (Figure 1B), and deer flies are similar in shape but have stripes on the abdomen and thorax and mottled wings with dark patches near the apex (Figure 1C).1

The Tabanidae family comprises 4455 species belonging to 137 genera and is notorious for bites that result in localized pain, swelling, itching, and discomfort.4 While some Tabanidae species are mechanical or biologic vectors of pathogens (eg, Loa loa, equine infectious anemia virus, Trypanosoma species, cattle and sheep anthrax and tularemia), yellow flies do not appear to play a considerable role in disease transmission.4,5 Nonetheless, their bites can cause discomfort and create a nuisance for individuals residing within their distribution areas as well as for agricultural livestock, contributing to lower weight gain and milk production.1
Yellow flies are a commonly occurring species in the southeastern United States; their distribution spans several states, including New Jersey, Florida, and Texas.1,2 In Florida, specifically, yellow flies exhibit a seasonal pattern, with peak activity typically occurring from April through June.6-9 Activity levels are heightened around sunset as well as sunrise.1,9 Tabanids can be found in forests, parks, and gardens—particularly those that contain waterways such as freshwater lakes and streams—and typically stay near shaded woodlands that are prone to flooding.9
Tabanids go through the life cycle stages of egg, larva, pupa, and adult; the life cycle typically spans 1 year, with the adults living 30 to 60 days.1 Mating occurs soon after adults emerge from the pupal case in the soil.1,10 Females then are attracted to large dark moving objects and will feed on blood to develop eggs.2,10 Only female members of the Tabanidae family have modifications of the mouth parts that allow wounding of the skin (Figure 2). Their bites introduce saliva to the skin containing anticoagulants and other likely allergens. The tongue is used to lap between 20 to 600 microliters of blood.11 Males feed primarily on pollen and nectar.10 Most tabanid bites result in transient wheal-and-flare reactions, but some can result in more severe allergic reactions such as in our reported case.10 Rarely, anaphylactic reactions have been documented.10,12

Case Report
A 48-year-old man presented with swelling of the left hand following a yellow fly bite to the wrist 30 minutes prior while he worked outside at a ranch in central Florida (Figure 3). The patient was afebrile and reported no respiratory or gastrointestinal symptoms. The left hand and forearm were warm to the touch and appeared red and edematous (Figure 4). He was not tachycardic and did not appear to be in any distress. The patient reported that he had worked on the ranch for several years, and during that time had noted he was developing worsening localized reactions to yellow fly bites. He had visually identified the offending insect prior to the current presentation and had trapped some flies in previous incidents. Recently he had experienced rapid swelling at the bite sites but had never experienced respiratory difficulties or signs of systemic allergic reactions. He previously had used topical steroids when bites resulted in mild wheal-and-flare reactions, but he reported that these were no longer effective.


Management of the current bite reaction included oral prednisone tapered over 1 week from 40 mg to 10 mg daily as well as oral cetirizine 10 mg daily. Although bacterial cellulitis was considered in the differential diagnosis, no oral antibiotics were prescribed given the patient’s history of similar clinical presentations following yellow fly bites. His symptoms resolved within a few hours of his dose of prednisone. Incidentally, our patient has been able to control the progression of subsequent hypersensitivity reactions to yellow fly bites with a single 20-mg dose of prednisone administered at the onset of the bite.
Comment
In general, blood-feeding (hematophagous) insects rarely cause anaphylaxis and are more likely to cause cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions, possibly due to the small amount of antigen injected from a bite.13,14 The immediate wheal-and-flare reaction is an IgE-mediated type 1 immune reaction compared to a less common type 4 T-cell mediated delayed hypersensitivity reaction.14,15 There are many protein allergens in the saliva of biting insects that are not well characterized. Relevant allergens include a 69 kDa salivary gland protein as well as a Tab y 1 (anticoagulant), Tab y 2 (hyaluronidase), and Tab y 5 (antigen 5–related venom protein).11,15-17 Some of these proteins have structural homology between insects of different orders and can cause cross-reactivity in patients who also are allergic to Hymenoptera stings (wasp-horsefly syndrome).12,16
Our patient’s cutaneous reaction was localized and clinically manifested with rapidly progressive erythema and edema at the bite location. He did not exhibit signs of a systemic reaction such as angioedema, respiratory or gastrointestinal symptoms, tachycardia, or hypotension. Management of affected patients depends on the extent of the reaction and may include oral or parenteral antihistamines as well as oral steroids for more severe edema.11 Anaphylactic reactions generally respond to subcutaneous epinephrine.15 It would be prudent for patients with a relevant anaphylactic history to carry an autoinjectable epinephrine pen in case of difficulty breathing or general malaise following a bite. Besides avoidance of insect bites, personal protection methods include wearing long-sleeved shirts and pants and using insect repellents containing diethyl toluamide (DEET), citronella, or geraniol.1
At present, diagnosis of cutaneous reactions to yellow fly bites is best made based on the patient’s personal history.14 If the offending fly is trapped, it can be identified. As most patients cannot differentiate between insects, it may be helpful for dermatologists to know that a small amount of blood at the bite site is suggestive of a fly bite rather than a sting from a member of the order Hymenoptera. Currently, there are no consistently useful extracts for intradermal skin testing.11 Although there are several commercially available serum-specific IgE tests for suspected horse fly reactions, their usefulness is doubtful without further information on sensitivity and specificity as well as the allergen utilized.11,18,19 The use of allergen immunotherapy to induce hyposensitization in patients who experience cutaneous reactions is not standardized and poses some risks including severe allergic reactions requiring facilities for resuscitation, variability of response patterns, and supporting evidence is weak.11
Final Thoughts
Cutaneous reactions to yellow fly bites rarely are described in the dermatology literature. The salivary proteins implicated in inducing an allergic response and cross-reactivity of D ferrugatus with other biting and stinging insects as well as the natural course of immune reactions over time need to be further characterized.
- Squitier JM. Deer flies, yellow flies, and horse flies, Chrysops, Diachlorus and Tabanus spp. (Insecta: Diptera: Tabanidae). University of Florida. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/IN155
- Fairchild GB, Weems HB Jr, Fasulo TR. Yellow fly, Diachlorus ferrugatus (Fabricius)(Insecta: Diptera: Tabanidae). University of Florida. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/IN595
- Mullens BA. Horse flies and deer flies (Tabanidae). In: Mullen G, Durden L. Med Vet Entomol. Elsevier Science; 2009:327-344.
- Akhoundi M, Sereno D, Marteau A, et al. Who bites me? A tentative discriminative key to diagnose hematophagous ectoparasites biting using clinical manifestations. Diagnostics (Basel). 2020;10:308.
- Cheng TC. General Parasitology. 2nd ed. Elsevier Science; 2021:660.
- Wells K, Varnadoe C, Dorman D, et al. Survey of the distribution and seasonal activity of yellow flies (Diptera: Tabanidae) in Florida, USA. J Vector Ecol. 2019;44:235-242.
- Hribar LJ, Leppla NC, Beshear RJ, et al. Seasonal abundance of Diachlorus ferrugatus (Diptera: Tabanidae) in Monroe County, Florida. Florida Scientist. 2003;66:52-54.
- Fairchild GB, Weems HV. Diachlorus ferrugatus (Fabricius), a fierce biting fly (Diptera: Tabanidae). Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry. Entomology Circular. 1973;139.
- Cilek JE, Schreiber ET. Diel host-seeking activity of adult Diachlorus ferrugatus (F.) (Diptera: Tabanidae) in Northwestern Florida. J Entomol Sci. 1999;34:462-466.
- Sean S. Tabanids (horseflies). Dermatol Online J. 1999;5:6.
- Whyte AF, Popeseu FD, Carlson J. Tabanidae insect (horsefly and deerfly) allergy in humans: a review of the literature. Clin Exp Allergy. 2020;50:886-893.
- Buonomo A, Rizzi A, Aruanno A, et al. Anaphylaxis after horsefly sting: a strange case of wasp-horsefly syndrome. Postepi Dermatol Alergol. 2021;2:331-332.
- Freye HB, Litwin C. Coexistent anaphylaxis to Diptera and Hymenoptera. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1996 76:270-272.
- Hemmer W, Wantke F. Insect hypersensitivity beyond bee and wasp venom allergy. Allergol Select. 2020;4:97-104.
- Ewan PW. Allergy to insect stings: a review. J R Soc Med. 1985;78:234-239.
- Ma D, Li Y, Dong J, et al. Purification and characterization of two new allergens from the salivary glands of the horsefly Tabanus yao. Allergy. 2011;66:101-109.
- Hemmer W, Focke M, Vieluf D, et al. Anaphylaxis induced by horsefly bites: identification of a 69 kd IgE-binding protein from Chrysops spp. (Diptera: Tabanidae) by western blot analysis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1998;101:134-136.
- Mayo Clinic Laboratories. Test catalog: horse fly. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://www.mayocliniclabs.com/search?q=horse%20fly
- HealthLabs.com. Horsefly allergy test. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://www.healthlabs.com/horsefly-allergy-testing
- Squitier JM. Deer flies, yellow flies, and horse flies, Chrysops, Diachlorus and Tabanus spp. (Insecta: Diptera: Tabanidae). University of Florida. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/IN155
- Fairchild GB, Weems HB Jr, Fasulo TR. Yellow fly, Diachlorus ferrugatus (Fabricius)(Insecta: Diptera: Tabanidae). University of Florida. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/publication/IN595
- Mullens BA. Horse flies and deer flies (Tabanidae). In: Mullen G, Durden L. Med Vet Entomol. Elsevier Science; 2009:327-344.
- Akhoundi M, Sereno D, Marteau A, et al. Who bites me? A tentative discriminative key to diagnose hematophagous ectoparasites biting using clinical manifestations. Diagnostics (Basel). 2020;10:308.
- Cheng TC. General Parasitology. 2nd ed. Elsevier Science; 2021:660.
- Wells K, Varnadoe C, Dorman D, et al. Survey of the distribution and seasonal activity of yellow flies (Diptera: Tabanidae) in Florida, USA. J Vector Ecol. 2019;44:235-242.
- Hribar LJ, Leppla NC, Beshear RJ, et al. Seasonal abundance of Diachlorus ferrugatus (Diptera: Tabanidae) in Monroe County, Florida. Florida Scientist. 2003;66:52-54.
- Fairchild GB, Weems HV. Diachlorus ferrugatus (Fabricius), a fierce biting fly (Diptera: Tabanidae). Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services, Division of Plant Industry. Entomology Circular. 1973;139.
- Cilek JE, Schreiber ET. Diel host-seeking activity of adult Diachlorus ferrugatus (F.) (Diptera: Tabanidae) in Northwestern Florida. J Entomol Sci. 1999;34:462-466.
- Sean S. Tabanids (horseflies). Dermatol Online J. 1999;5:6.
- Whyte AF, Popeseu FD, Carlson J. Tabanidae insect (horsefly and deerfly) allergy in humans: a review of the literature. Clin Exp Allergy. 2020;50:886-893.
- Buonomo A, Rizzi A, Aruanno A, et al. Anaphylaxis after horsefly sting: a strange case of wasp-horsefly syndrome. Postepi Dermatol Alergol. 2021;2:331-332.
- Freye HB, Litwin C. Coexistent anaphylaxis to Diptera and Hymenoptera. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1996 76:270-272.
- Hemmer W, Wantke F. Insect hypersensitivity beyond bee and wasp venom allergy. Allergol Select. 2020;4:97-104.
- Ewan PW. Allergy to insect stings: a review. J R Soc Med. 1985;78:234-239.
- Ma D, Li Y, Dong J, et al. Purification and characterization of two new allergens from the salivary glands of the horsefly Tabanus yao. Allergy. 2011;66:101-109.
- Hemmer W, Focke M, Vieluf D, et al. Anaphylaxis induced by horsefly bites: identification of a 69 kd IgE-binding protein from Chrysops spp. (Diptera: Tabanidae) by western blot analysis. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1998;101:134-136.
- Mayo Clinic Laboratories. Test catalog: horse fly. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://www.mayocliniclabs.com/search?q=horse%20fly
- HealthLabs.com. Horsefly allergy test. Accessed March 11, 2025. https://www.healthlabs.com/horsefly-allergy-testing
Managing Cutaneous Reactions to Yellow Fly (Diachlorus ferrugatus) Bites
Managing Cutaneous Reactions to Yellow Fly (Diachlorus ferrugatus) Bites
PRACTICE POINTS
- Diachlorus ferrugatus, commonly known as the yellow fly, belongs to the Tabanidae family of insects that also includes deer flies and horse flies.
- The female yellow fly can instill a painful bite in humans and can cause local and systemic allergic reactions.
- Medical management of yellow fly bites is dictated by the severity of the reaction.
Not as Bland as You May Think: Celery (Apium graveolens) Commonly Induces Phytophotodermatitis
Not as Bland as You May Think: Celery (Apium graveolens) Commonly Induces Phytophotodermatitis
Celery (Apium graveolens)—that lowly vegetable that often languishes in the refrigerator crisper and apparently supplies fewer calories than are required to consume it—contains a myriad of photosensitizing chemicals known as furocoumarins and psoralens that can cause phytophotodermatitis (PPD) when handled prior to exposure to UV light.1 Individuals who are most likely to develop PPD caused by repeated contact with celery include food industry workers (eg, grocery store workers, farmers) who pick, handle, or prepare celery for consumption. While eating celery as part of a standard diet is highly unlikely to cause PPD, celery infected with Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (known as pink rot) causes more severe generalized sun sensitivity due to an increased amount of furocoumarins produced in response to the fungus.2 Contact with celery also can induce cutaneous manifestations unrelated to sun exposure in some individuals, including urticaria, allergic contact dermatitis, and anaphylaxis.3 In this article, we provide an overview of the life cycle and origin of celery as well as its irritant and allergic properties. We also describe cutaneous rashes associated with PPD caused by exposure to celery and highlight treatment options.
Morphology and Distribution
The Apiaceae family features aromatic flowering plants that comprise more than 3500 species, including many economically important vegetables, herbs, and spices.4 It also includes many alkaloid-containing species that are known to be poisonous to humans, such as poison hemlock (Conium maculatum) and water hemlock (Cicuta maculate). Most Apiaceae plants that are consumed by humans originate from the Mediterranean region.5 While known for their diversity of flavor and aroma, most of the plants from this family have low caloric value and provide minimal amounts of energy.
Members of the Apiaceae family have flowers that create a classic umbel shape mimicking the appearance of an upside-down umbrella (thus the former name for this family, Umbelliferae). The pedicles—the small stems attached to the base of each flower—spread from a common center to form the umbel.5 The Apiaceae family also includes the greatest number of plants that cause PPD due to their high concentration of furocoumarins, which deter fungus from harming the plants.6
A biennial plant, celery completes its life cycle in 2 years. During the first season, the stems, roots, and leaves sprout; in the second and final year, the flowers, fruits, and seeds proliferate, followed by decomposition. Apium graveolens approaches heights of 2 to 3 ft, growing upright and displaying grooved stems. Each stem terminates in a basal rosette of leaves. The second season brings white flower blooms in terminal or axillary umbels.7
Celery originated in the temperate Mediterranean regions of Europe, but farmers now cultivate it globally.8 It grows best in rich moist soil with full exposure to sunlight. Plants multiply their numbers through self-seeding. Celery commonly is found in suburban and rural homes, both in refrigerators for consumption as well as in medicine cabinets in capsule form for the treatment of arthritis.4
Irritant and Allergenic Properties
Despite the potential health benefits of celery, the Apiaceae family, which includes hogweed, dill, and fennel, prevails as the most common culprit for phytotoxic reactions. The Rutaceae family, including citrus plants and rue, remains runner-up for causes of PPD.9 Phytophotodermatitis is not an immunologic reaction, making anyone susceptible to formation of the cutaneous lesions when exposed to UV light after handling celery. Pruritis rarely occurs, unlike in allergic phytodermatitis.10 Upon photoexcitation from exposure to UVA light, individual psoralen molecules covalently bind to pyrimidine bases, causing interstrand cross-linking that prevents DNA replication and triggering a cascade leading to apoptosis of the cell. Apoptosis induces cell membrane edema, which manifests as cutaneous vesicles and bullae on the skin.10 Regardless of plant species, PPD reactions have similar appearance.
Celery roots contain the greatest concentration of psoralens, making it the most likely part of the plant to induce PPD.6 Phytophotodermatitis caused by celery can occur at any time of the year, but most eruptions occur during the summer months due to increased sunlight exposure and intensity. Among 320 randomly selected Michigan celery harvesters, 163 (51%) displayed evidence of vesicular and bullous dermatitis on the fingers, hands, and forearms.11 In this study, celery infected with pink rot fungus induced an erythematous eruption with vesicles and bullae within 48 hours of contact after just 30 seconds of summer sunlight exposure; however, eruptions are not limited to summer months, as the cutaneous presentation depends solely on exposure to UVA light, which can occur year-round.
Use of tanning beds is a major risk factor for PPD.12 Tanning beds utilize fluorescent bulbs that primarily emit UVA light, with UVB light emitted to a lesser degree. The UVA radiation produced by tanning beds is more than 3 times as intense as natural sunlight.12 Among grocery store employees, the combination of these 2 risk factors—regular contact with celery and tanning bed use—resulted in a prevalence ratio for PPD more than 40 times greater than that of individuals with neither risk factor.13
Cutaneous Manifestations of PPD
Phytophotodermatitis is a nonimmunologic dermatitis that forms via the interaction between UV light exposure and the photosensitizing chemicals inherent to some plant species. Development of PPD following contact with celery may be caused by the photoactive substances in celery, including the psoralens 8-methoxypsoralen and 5-methoxypsoralen.14 The psoralens must become activated by UV light with wavelengths between 320 nm and 400 nm (UVA) to initiate biologic effects.15
Once chemically activated, the photoactive mediators cause an erythematous and edematous sunburnlike reaction. Current hypotheses state that psoralen plus UVA generates reactive oxygen species, which damage the DNA within cells and alter receptors on cell membranes within the epidermis.14 The cutaneous eruption usually appears between 12 and 36 hours after sun exposure. Although they generally are not pruritic, the eruptions may induce pain. Within 7 to 10 days following development of the rash, hyperpigmentation occurs in the affected area and often persists for months to years.16 Ingestion of large amounts of celery has been cited to cause generalized phototoxic reactions; however, PPD rarely arises solely after ingestion, unless excessive amounts are consumed with concomitant exposure to psoralen plus UVA or tanning beds.17 In these cases, patients develop diffuse redness with superficial scaling, pain, and blistering if severe.
Treatment of PPD
Prevention remains the best form of treatment for PPD caused by exposure to celery. Postcontact management includes washing the affected area with soap and water and changing clothes promptly. Topical corticosteroids have mild utility in treatment of PPD.18 Oral steroid tapers, which reduce acute inflammation, also are an option for treatment. Alternatively, intramuscular triamcinolone acetonide 1 mg/kg mixed with budesonide 0.1 mg/kg is an option and is associated with a reduced risk for adverse effects compared to oral steroids. The resulting hyperpigmentation develops 1 to 2 weeks postepithelialization.19 Hyperpigmentation often fades slowly over several months in lighter-skinned individuals but may last for years or indefinitely in darker-skinned patients.
Final Thoughts
Dermatologists should be knowledgeable about the various plant culprits that can induce PPD. Understanding the mechanism and pathophysiology can help guide both therapeutic interventions and preventive counseling. Understanding that even readily available vegetables such as celery can induce cutaneous eruptions should put PPD in the differential diagnosis more commonly when unspecified dermatitides are present.
- Walansky A. Study finally confirms eating celery burns more calories than it contains. Food & Wine. June 22, 2017. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.foodandwine.com/news/study-finally-confirms-eating-celery-burns-more-caloriesit-contains
- Puig L. Enhancement of PUVA phototoxic effects following celery ingestion: cool broth also can burn. Arch Dermatol. 1994;130:809-810. doi:10.1001/archderm.130.6.809
- Perez-Pimiento AJ, Moneo I, Santaolalla M, et al. Anaphylactic reaction to young garlic. Allergy. 1999;54:626-629.
- The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. Apiaceae. Britannica. Updated November 25, 2024. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/plant/Apiaceae
- Smith R. Celery. In: Geoffriau E, Simon PW, eds. Carrots and Related Apiaceae Crops. 2nd ed. CABI; 2021:272-282.
- Dijkstra JWE, Chang L. Severe phototoxic burn following celery ingestion. Arch Dermatol. 1992;128:1277.
- Tobyn G, Denham A, Whitelegg M. Apium graveolens, wild celery. The Western Herbal Tradition: 2000 years of Medicinal Plant Knowledge. Elsevier. 2011:79-89. doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-10344-5.00014-8
- Rademaker M. Celery. DermNet. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://dermnetnz.org/topics/celery
- Sasseville D. Clinical patterns of phytophotodermatitis. Dermatol Clin. 2009;27:299-308.
- Jin Goon AT, Goh CL. Plant dermatitis: Asian perspective. Indian J Dermatol. 2011;56:707-710. doi:10.4103/0019-5154.91833
- Birmingham DJ, Key MM, Tublich GE. Phototoxic bullae among celery harvesters. Arch Dermatol. 1961;83:73-87.
- Robb-Nicholson C. By the way, doctor: is a tanning bed safer than sunlight? Harvard Health Publishing. Harvard Medical School. September 1, 2009. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/is-a-tanning-bed-saferthan-sunlight
- Vester L, Thyssen JP, Menne T, et al. Consequences of occupational food-related hand dermatoses with a focus on protein contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;67:328-333.
- Ling TC, Clayton TH, Crawley J, et al. British Association of Dermatologists and British Photodermatology Group guidelines for the safe and effective use of psoralen-ultraviolet A therapy 2015. Br J Dermatol. 2016;174:24-55.
- Laskin JD. Cellular and molecular mechanisms in photochemical sensitization: studies on the mechanism of action of psoralens. Food Chem Toxicol. 1994;32:119-127. doi:10.1016/0278-6915(94)90172-4
- Elmets CA. Photosensitivity disorders (photodermatoses): clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment. UpToDate. Updated February 23, 2023. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/photosensitivity-disorders-photodermatoses-clinical-manifestations-diagnosis-and-treatment
- Boffa, MJ, Gilmour E, Ead RD. Celery soup causing severe phototoxity during PUVA therapy. Br J Dermatol. 1996;135:334. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.1996.tb01182.x
- Sarhane KA, Ibrahim A, Fagan SP, et al. Phytophotodermatitis. Eplasty. 2013;13:ic57.
- McGovern TW. Dermatoses due to plants. In: Bolognia JL, Jorizzo JL, Rapini RP, et al, eds. Dermatology. Mosby; 2018:286-303.
Celery (Apium graveolens)—that lowly vegetable that often languishes in the refrigerator crisper and apparently supplies fewer calories than are required to consume it—contains a myriad of photosensitizing chemicals known as furocoumarins and psoralens that can cause phytophotodermatitis (PPD) when handled prior to exposure to UV light.1 Individuals who are most likely to develop PPD caused by repeated contact with celery include food industry workers (eg, grocery store workers, farmers) who pick, handle, or prepare celery for consumption. While eating celery as part of a standard diet is highly unlikely to cause PPD, celery infected with Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (known as pink rot) causes more severe generalized sun sensitivity due to an increased amount of furocoumarins produced in response to the fungus.2 Contact with celery also can induce cutaneous manifestations unrelated to sun exposure in some individuals, including urticaria, allergic contact dermatitis, and anaphylaxis.3 In this article, we provide an overview of the life cycle and origin of celery as well as its irritant and allergic properties. We also describe cutaneous rashes associated with PPD caused by exposure to celery and highlight treatment options.
Morphology and Distribution
The Apiaceae family features aromatic flowering plants that comprise more than 3500 species, including many economically important vegetables, herbs, and spices.4 It also includes many alkaloid-containing species that are known to be poisonous to humans, such as poison hemlock (Conium maculatum) and water hemlock (Cicuta maculate). Most Apiaceae plants that are consumed by humans originate from the Mediterranean region.5 While known for their diversity of flavor and aroma, most of the plants from this family have low caloric value and provide minimal amounts of energy.
Members of the Apiaceae family have flowers that create a classic umbel shape mimicking the appearance of an upside-down umbrella (thus the former name for this family, Umbelliferae). The pedicles—the small stems attached to the base of each flower—spread from a common center to form the umbel.5 The Apiaceae family also includes the greatest number of plants that cause PPD due to their high concentration of furocoumarins, which deter fungus from harming the plants.6
A biennial plant, celery completes its life cycle in 2 years. During the first season, the stems, roots, and leaves sprout; in the second and final year, the flowers, fruits, and seeds proliferate, followed by decomposition. Apium graveolens approaches heights of 2 to 3 ft, growing upright and displaying grooved stems. Each stem terminates in a basal rosette of leaves. The second season brings white flower blooms in terminal or axillary umbels.7
Celery originated in the temperate Mediterranean regions of Europe, but farmers now cultivate it globally.8 It grows best in rich moist soil with full exposure to sunlight. Plants multiply their numbers through self-seeding. Celery commonly is found in suburban and rural homes, both in refrigerators for consumption as well as in medicine cabinets in capsule form for the treatment of arthritis.4
Irritant and Allergenic Properties
Despite the potential health benefits of celery, the Apiaceae family, which includes hogweed, dill, and fennel, prevails as the most common culprit for phytotoxic reactions. The Rutaceae family, including citrus plants and rue, remains runner-up for causes of PPD.9 Phytophotodermatitis is not an immunologic reaction, making anyone susceptible to formation of the cutaneous lesions when exposed to UV light after handling celery. Pruritis rarely occurs, unlike in allergic phytodermatitis.10 Upon photoexcitation from exposure to UVA light, individual psoralen molecules covalently bind to pyrimidine bases, causing interstrand cross-linking that prevents DNA replication and triggering a cascade leading to apoptosis of the cell. Apoptosis induces cell membrane edema, which manifests as cutaneous vesicles and bullae on the skin.10 Regardless of plant species, PPD reactions have similar appearance.
Celery roots contain the greatest concentration of psoralens, making it the most likely part of the plant to induce PPD.6 Phytophotodermatitis caused by celery can occur at any time of the year, but most eruptions occur during the summer months due to increased sunlight exposure and intensity. Among 320 randomly selected Michigan celery harvesters, 163 (51%) displayed evidence of vesicular and bullous dermatitis on the fingers, hands, and forearms.11 In this study, celery infected with pink rot fungus induced an erythematous eruption with vesicles and bullae within 48 hours of contact after just 30 seconds of summer sunlight exposure; however, eruptions are not limited to summer months, as the cutaneous presentation depends solely on exposure to UVA light, which can occur year-round.
Use of tanning beds is a major risk factor for PPD.12 Tanning beds utilize fluorescent bulbs that primarily emit UVA light, with UVB light emitted to a lesser degree. The UVA radiation produced by tanning beds is more than 3 times as intense as natural sunlight.12 Among grocery store employees, the combination of these 2 risk factors—regular contact with celery and tanning bed use—resulted in a prevalence ratio for PPD more than 40 times greater than that of individuals with neither risk factor.13
Cutaneous Manifestations of PPD
Phytophotodermatitis is a nonimmunologic dermatitis that forms via the interaction between UV light exposure and the photosensitizing chemicals inherent to some plant species. Development of PPD following contact with celery may be caused by the photoactive substances in celery, including the psoralens 8-methoxypsoralen and 5-methoxypsoralen.14 The psoralens must become activated by UV light with wavelengths between 320 nm and 400 nm (UVA) to initiate biologic effects.15
Once chemically activated, the photoactive mediators cause an erythematous and edematous sunburnlike reaction. Current hypotheses state that psoralen plus UVA generates reactive oxygen species, which damage the DNA within cells and alter receptors on cell membranes within the epidermis.14 The cutaneous eruption usually appears between 12 and 36 hours after sun exposure. Although they generally are not pruritic, the eruptions may induce pain. Within 7 to 10 days following development of the rash, hyperpigmentation occurs in the affected area and often persists for months to years.16 Ingestion of large amounts of celery has been cited to cause generalized phototoxic reactions; however, PPD rarely arises solely after ingestion, unless excessive amounts are consumed with concomitant exposure to psoralen plus UVA or tanning beds.17 In these cases, patients develop diffuse redness with superficial scaling, pain, and blistering if severe.
Treatment of PPD
Prevention remains the best form of treatment for PPD caused by exposure to celery. Postcontact management includes washing the affected area with soap and water and changing clothes promptly. Topical corticosteroids have mild utility in treatment of PPD.18 Oral steroid tapers, which reduce acute inflammation, also are an option for treatment. Alternatively, intramuscular triamcinolone acetonide 1 mg/kg mixed with budesonide 0.1 mg/kg is an option and is associated with a reduced risk for adverse effects compared to oral steroids. The resulting hyperpigmentation develops 1 to 2 weeks postepithelialization.19 Hyperpigmentation often fades slowly over several months in lighter-skinned individuals but may last for years or indefinitely in darker-skinned patients.
Final Thoughts
Dermatologists should be knowledgeable about the various plant culprits that can induce PPD. Understanding the mechanism and pathophysiology can help guide both therapeutic interventions and preventive counseling. Understanding that even readily available vegetables such as celery can induce cutaneous eruptions should put PPD in the differential diagnosis more commonly when unspecified dermatitides are present.
Celery (Apium graveolens)—that lowly vegetable that often languishes in the refrigerator crisper and apparently supplies fewer calories than are required to consume it—contains a myriad of photosensitizing chemicals known as furocoumarins and psoralens that can cause phytophotodermatitis (PPD) when handled prior to exposure to UV light.1 Individuals who are most likely to develop PPD caused by repeated contact with celery include food industry workers (eg, grocery store workers, farmers) who pick, handle, or prepare celery for consumption. While eating celery as part of a standard diet is highly unlikely to cause PPD, celery infected with Sclerotinia sclerotiorum (known as pink rot) causes more severe generalized sun sensitivity due to an increased amount of furocoumarins produced in response to the fungus.2 Contact with celery also can induce cutaneous manifestations unrelated to sun exposure in some individuals, including urticaria, allergic contact dermatitis, and anaphylaxis.3 In this article, we provide an overview of the life cycle and origin of celery as well as its irritant and allergic properties. We also describe cutaneous rashes associated with PPD caused by exposure to celery and highlight treatment options.
Morphology and Distribution
The Apiaceae family features aromatic flowering plants that comprise more than 3500 species, including many economically important vegetables, herbs, and spices.4 It also includes many alkaloid-containing species that are known to be poisonous to humans, such as poison hemlock (Conium maculatum) and water hemlock (Cicuta maculate). Most Apiaceae plants that are consumed by humans originate from the Mediterranean region.5 While known for their diversity of flavor and aroma, most of the plants from this family have low caloric value and provide minimal amounts of energy.
Members of the Apiaceae family have flowers that create a classic umbel shape mimicking the appearance of an upside-down umbrella (thus the former name for this family, Umbelliferae). The pedicles—the small stems attached to the base of each flower—spread from a common center to form the umbel.5 The Apiaceae family also includes the greatest number of plants that cause PPD due to their high concentration of furocoumarins, which deter fungus from harming the plants.6
A biennial plant, celery completes its life cycle in 2 years. During the first season, the stems, roots, and leaves sprout; in the second and final year, the flowers, fruits, and seeds proliferate, followed by decomposition. Apium graveolens approaches heights of 2 to 3 ft, growing upright and displaying grooved stems. Each stem terminates in a basal rosette of leaves. The second season brings white flower blooms in terminal or axillary umbels.7
Celery originated in the temperate Mediterranean regions of Europe, but farmers now cultivate it globally.8 It grows best in rich moist soil with full exposure to sunlight. Plants multiply their numbers through self-seeding. Celery commonly is found in suburban and rural homes, both in refrigerators for consumption as well as in medicine cabinets in capsule form for the treatment of arthritis.4
Irritant and Allergenic Properties
Despite the potential health benefits of celery, the Apiaceae family, which includes hogweed, dill, and fennel, prevails as the most common culprit for phytotoxic reactions. The Rutaceae family, including citrus plants and rue, remains runner-up for causes of PPD.9 Phytophotodermatitis is not an immunologic reaction, making anyone susceptible to formation of the cutaneous lesions when exposed to UV light after handling celery. Pruritis rarely occurs, unlike in allergic phytodermatitis.10 Upon photoexcitation from exposure to UVA light, individual psoralen molecules covalently bind to pyrimidine bases, causing interstrand cross-linking that prevents DNA replication and triggering a cascade leading to apoptosis of the cell. Apoptosis induces cell membrane edema, which manifests as cutaneous vesicles and bullae on the skin.10 Regardless of plant species, PPD reactions have similar appearance.
Celery roots contain the greatest concentration of psoralens, making it the most likely part of the plant to induce PPD.6 Phytophotodermatitis caused by celery can occur at any time of the year, but most eruptions occur during the summer months due to increased sunlight exposure and intensity. Among 320 randomly selected Michigan celery harvesters, 163 (51%) displayed evidence of vesicular and bullous dermatitis on the fingers, hands, and forearms.11 In this study, celery infected with pink rot fungus induced an erythematous eruption with vesicles and bullae within 48 hours of contact after just 30 seconds of summer sunlight exposure; however, eruptions are not limited to summer months, as the cutaneous presentation depends solely on exposure to UVA light, which can occur year-round.
Use of tanning beds is a major risk factor for PPD.12 Tanning beds utilize fluorescent bulbs that primarily emit UVA light, with UVB light emitted to a lesser degree. The UVA radiation produced by tanning beds is more than 3 times as intense as natural sunlight.12 Among grocery store employees, the combination of these 2 risk factors—regular contact with celery and tanning bed use—resulted in a prevalence ratio for PPD more than 40 times greater than that of individuals with neither risk factor.13
Cutaneous Manifestations of PPD
Phytophotodermatitis is a nonimmunologic dermatitis that forms via the interaction between UV light exposure and the photosensitizing chemicals inherent to some plant species. Development of PPD following contact with celery may be caused by the photoactive substances in celery, including the psoralens 8-methoxypsoralen and 5-methoxypsoralen.14 The psoralens must become activated by UV light with wavelengths between 320 nm and 400 nm (UVA) to initiate biologic effects.15
Once chemically activated, the photoactive mediators cause an erythematous and edematous sunburnlike reaction. Current hypotheses state that psoralen plus UVA generates reactive oxygen species, which damage the DNA within cells and alter receptors on cell membranes within the epidermis.14 The cutaneous eruption usually appears between 12 and 36 hours after sun exposure. Although they generally are not pruritic, the eruptions may induce pain. Within 7 to 10 days following development of the rash, hyperpigmentation occurs in the affected area and often persists for months to years.16 Ingestion of large amounts of celery has been cited to cause generalized phototoxic reactions; however, PPD rarely arises solely after ingestion, unless excessive amounts are consumed with concomitant exposure to psoralen plus UVA or tanning beds.17 In these cases, patients develop diffuse redness with superficial scaling, pain, and blistering if severe.
Treatment of PPD
Prevention remains the best form of treatment for PPD caused by exposure to celery. Postcontact management includes washing the affected area with soap and water and changing clothes promptly. Topical corticosteroids have mild utility in treatment of PPD.18 Oral steroid tapers, which reduce acute inflammation, also are an option for treatment. Alternatively, intramuscular triamcinolone acetonide 1 mg/kg mixed with budesonide 0.1 mg/kg is an option and is associated with a reduced risk for adverse effects compared to oral steroids. The resulting hyperpigmentation develops 1 to 2 weeks postepithelialization.19 Hyperpigmentation often fades slowly over several months in lighter-skinned individuals but may last for years or indefinitely in darker-skinned patients.
Final Thoughts
Dermatologists should be knowledgeable about the various plant culprits that can induce PPD. Understanding the mechanism and pathophysiology can help guide both therapeutic interventions and preventive counseling. Understanding that even readily available vegetables such as celery can induce cutaneous eruptions should put PPD in the differential diagnosis more commonly when unspecified dermatitides are present.
- Walansky A. Study finally confirms eating celery burns more calories than it contains. Food & Wine. June 22, 2017. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.foodandwine.com/news/study-finally-confirms-eating-celery-burns-more-caloriesit-contains
- Puig L. Enhancement of PUVA phototoxic effects following celery ingestion: cool broth also can burn. Arch Dermatol. 1994;130:809-810. doi:10.1001/archderm.130.6.809
- Perez-Pimiento AJ, Moneo I, Santaolalla M, et al. Anaphylactic reaction to young garlic. Allergy. 1999;54:626-629.
- The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. Apiaceae. Britannica. Updated November 25, 2024. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/plant/Apiaceae
- Smith R. Celery. In: Geoffriau E, Simon PW, eds. Carrots and Related Apiaceae Crops. 2nd ed. CABI; 2021:272-282.
- Dijkstra JWE, Chang L. Severe phototoxic burn following celery ingestion. Arch Dermatol. 1992;128:1277.
- Tobyn G, Denham A, Whitelegg M. Apium graveolens, wild celery. The Western Herbal Tradition: 2000 years of Medicinal Plant Knowledge. Elsevier. 2011:79-89. doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-10344-5.00014-8
- Rademaker M. Celery. DermNet. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://dermnetnz.org/topics/celery
- Sasseville D. Clinical patterns of phytophotodermatitis. Dermatol Clin. 2009;27:299-308.
- Jin Goon AT, Goh CL. Plant dermatitis: Asian perspective. Indian J Dermatol. 2011;56:707-710. doi:10.4103/0019-5154.91833
- Birmingham DJ, Key MM, Tublich GE. Phototoxic bullae among celery harvesters. Arch Dermatol. 1961;83:73-87.
- Robb-Nicholson C. By the way, doctor: is a tanning bed safer than sunlight? Harvard Health Publishing. Harvard Medical School. September 1, 2009. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/is-a-tanning-bed-saferthan-sunlight
- Vester L, Thyssen JP, Menne T, et al. Consequences of occupational food-related hand dermatoses with a focus on protein contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;67:328-333.
- Ling TC, Clayton TH, Crawley J, et al. British Association of Dermatologists and British Photodermatology Group guidelines for the safe and effective use of psoralen-ultraviolet A therapy 2015. Br J Dermatol. 2016;174:24-55.
- Laskin JD. Cellular and molecular mechanisms in photochemical sensitization: studies on the mechanism of action of psoralens. Food Chem Toxicol. 1994;32:119-127. doi:10.1016/0278-6915(94)90172-4
- Elmets CA. Photosensitivity disorders (photodermatoses): clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment. UpToDate. Updated February 23, 2023. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/photosensitivity-disorders-photodermatoses-clinical-manifestations-diagnosis-and-treatment
- Boffa, MJ, Gilmour E, Ead RD. Celery soup causing severe phototoxity during PUVA therapy. Br J Dermatol. 1996;135:334. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.1996.tb01182.x
- Sarhane KA, Ibrahim A, Fagan SP, et al. Phytophotodermatitis. Eplasty. 2013;13:ic57.
- McGovern TW. Dermatoses due to plants. In: Bolognia JL, Jorizzo JL, Rapini RP, et al, eds. Dermatology. Mosby; 2018:286-303.
- Walansky A. Study finally confirms eating celery burns more calories than it contains. Food & Wine. June 22, 2017. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.foodandwine.com/news/study-finally-confirms-eating-celery-burns-more-caloriesit-contains
- Puig L. Enhancement of PUVA phototoxic effects following celery ingestion: cool broth also can burn. Arch Dermatol. 1994;130:809-810. doi:10.1001/archderm.130.6.809
- Perez-Pimiento AJ, Moneo I, Santaolalla M, et al. Anaphylactic reaction to young garlic. Allergy. 1999;54:626-629.
- The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica. Apiaceae. Britannica. Updated November 25, 2024. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.britannica.com/plant/Apiaceae
- Smith R. Celery. In: Geoffriau E, Simon PW, eds. Carrots and Related Apiaceae Crops. 2nd ed. CABI; 2021:272-282.
- Dijkstra JWE, Chang L. Severe phototoxic burn following celery ingestion. Arch Dermatol. 1992;128:1277.
- Tobyn G, Denham A, Whitelegg M. Apium graveolens, wild celery. The Western Herbal Tradition: 2000 years of Medicinal Plant Knowledge. Elsevier. 2011:79-89. doi:10.1016/b978-0-443-10344-5.00014-8
- Rademaker M. Celery. DermNet. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://dermnetnz.org/topics/celery
- Sasseville D. Clinical patterns of phytophotodermatitis. Dermatol Clin. 2009;27:299-308.
- Jin Goon AT, Goh CL. Plant dermatitis: Asian perspective. Indian J Dermatol. 2011;56:707-710. doi:10.4103/0019-5154.91833
- Birmingham DJ, Key MM, Tublich GE. Phototoxic bullae among celery harvesters. Arch Dermatol. 1961;83:73-87.
- Robb-Nicholson C. By the way, doctor: is a tanning bed safer than sunlight? Harvard Health Publishing. Harvard Medical School. September 1, 2009. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.health.harvard.edu/staying-healthy/is-a-tanning-bed-saferthan-sunlight
- Vester L, Thyssen JP, Menne T, et al. Consequences of occupational food-related hand dermatoses with a focus on protein contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;67:328-333.
- Ling TC, Clayton TH, Crawley J, et al. British Association of Dermatologists and British Photodermatology Group guidelines for the safe and effective use of psoralen-ultraviolet A therapy 2015. Br J Dermatol. 2016;174:24-55.
- Laskin JD. Cellular and molecular mechanisms in photochemical sensitization: studies on the mechanism of action of psoralens. Food Chem Toxicol. 1994;32:119-127. doi:10.1016/0278-6915(94)90172-4
- Elmets CA. Photosensitivity disorders (photodermatoses): clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and treatment. UpToDate. Updated February 23, 2023. Accessed January 17, 2025. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/photosensitivity-disorders-photodermatoses-clinical-manifestations-diagnosis-and-treatment
- Boffa, MJ, Gilmour E, Ead RD. Celery soup causing severe phototoxity during PUVA therapy. Br J Dermatol. 1996;135:334. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.1996.tb01182.x
- Sarhane KA, Ibrahim A, Fagan SP, et al. Phytophotodermatitis. Eplasty. 2013;13:ic57.
- McGovern TW. Dermatoses due to plants. In: Bolognia JL, Jorizzo JL, Rapini RP, et al, eds. Dermatology. Mosby; 2018:286-303.
Not as Bland as You May Think: Celery (Apium graveolens) Commonly Induces Phytophotodermatitis
Not as Bland as You May Think: Celery (Apium graveolens) Commonly Induces Phytophotodermatitis
PRACTICE POINTS
- Clinicians should consider phytophotodermatitis (PPD) in the differential diagnosis for erythematous eruptions with bullae and vesicles manifesting in sun-exposed distributions.
- A clinical history that includes the patient’s occupation, diet, and history of treatment with psoralen plus UVA and use of tanning beds may help diagnose PPD.
- It is important to educate patients who regularly handle celery and other plants containing furocoumarins and psoralens on how to prevent PPD and utilize effective photoprotection.
Key Features of North American Venomous Snake Bites
Key Features of North American Venomous Snake Bites
North American venomous snakes traditionally are classified as members of either the Viperidae (eg, rattlesnakes, copperheads, cottonmouths) or Elapidae (eg, coral snakes) families and account for roughly 5000 to 10,000 reported envenomations annually.1,2 In 2021, America’s Poison Centers reported 2287 calls related to copperheads, 71 related to coral snakes, 229 related to cottonmouths, 1184 related to rattlesnakes, and 524 related to unknown snakes.3 The majority of calls related to snake bites were for adult patients, resulting in absent to minor outcomes. Only 1 death due to a rattlesnake bite was reported.3 Death by envenomation from a North American snake species is considered rare and typically is attributed to a lapse in medical attention; however, rattlesnakes are the most common reported cause of death by snake envenomation (Figure 1).1,3 A study comparing snake bites and hospital stays in the southeast vs southwest United States found that the southeast had the highest incidence of copperhead bites (37%), while the southwest had a higher incidence of rattlesnake bites (70%); those who were bitten by a rattlesnake were reported to have more severe symptoms and greater need for medical attention and antivenin.4 Some reports have linked pediatric and elderly patients to worse outcomes.5 However, one study examining 24,388 emergency department visits for snake bites from 2006 through 2014 found that the majority of pediatric cases were handled by non– trauma centers in the southern United States,6 supporting evidence found by Campbell et al7 indicating that most snake bites in children can be managed with conservative care. Though reported complications—including weakness, paralysis, hypovolemic shock, thrombocytopenia, and death—from North American venomous snake bites are low, they are still considered a medical emergency.8 It is essential for physicians to understand the clinical manifestations and treatment of North American venomous snake bites and to educate patients on how to protect themselves against and avoid provoking snakes, particularly in rural areas.2 In this article, we review the characteristics of common North American venomous snakes and the clinical manifestations of their bites. We also discuss the appropriate measures for staging, evaluating, and treating snake envenomation to improve patient management and care.

Features of North American Venomous Snakes
Individual snakes within the Viperidae family vary in size, markings and coloration, activity, and region, and physicians should consult their local health departments regarding snakes that are common in their area.2 Cottonmouth snakes are semiaquatic and traditionally are found within the southern and central United States. With a spade-shaped head and distinct two-tone coloration, cottonmouths may be mistaken for other nonvenomous water snakes in these regions (Figure 2).2 Copperheads, true to their name, are red in color; they inhabit a large portion of the southeastern United States and eastern Texas regions and are the cause of the majority of venomous snake bites in North America (Figure 3). Both cottonmouths and copperheads are believed to bite and envenomate as a defensive mechanism when provoked.


Coral snakes, found in the eastern United States and Texas regions, are the only subspecies of the Elapidae family (Figure 4).2,9 They can be distinguished from the nonvenomous milk snake by their characteristic banding, as coral snakes are patterned in a red-yellow-black band sequence and milk snakes are patterned in a red-black-yellow or white sequence. The differences in appearance of these snakes often is remembered by the phrase “red on yellow kills a fellow.”

Anatomic differences between the Viperidae and Elapidae families, including fang size, placement, and type, as well as venom composition, are directly linked to clinical manifestations of the bites. Viperidae fangs extend from the maxillary bones and are mobile, long, and hollow, making it easy for the snake to control fang movement and envenomation.9 Viperidae snakes are uniquely capable of inflicting puncture wounds without the injection of venom, known as dry bites. In contrast, Elapidae snakes have short, hollow, and fixed fangs, and thus patients can protect themselves by wearing appropriate clothing and covered footwear.9 Currently, identifying the type of snake responsible for the bite relies on visualization of the snake and/or the identification of clinical symptoms of envenomation by a dermatologist.
Clinical Manifestations of Venomous Snake Bites
Clinical manifestations and cutaneous findings often are used to grade the severity of venomous snake bites as well as to dictate treatment procedures. Grade 0 indicates a bite has occurred without envenomation, while grades I to V describe the progression and severity of envenomation.10 Grade I describes minimal erythema and edema around the site (fang marks may or may not be present) and no systemic symptoms. Grade II describes erythema and edema extending up the extremity to the first joint (eg, hand to wrist), pain, some systemic symptoms if there is rapid progression, and potential bleeding at the site. Grade III describes erythema and edema spreading to the second joint in the extremity, pain, and systemic symptoms, including coagulation defects. Grade IV describes erythema and edema of the whole extremity, a rapid reaction and progression following the bite, and risk for compartment syndrome. Grade V includes erythema and edema beyond the extremity and increasing systemic symptoms.10
Local pain and edema, usually on easily accessible or exposed extremities, are the most common clinical symptoms reported following a Viperidae snake bite.11 Due to their capability of producing a dry bite, puncture markings alone do not indicate envenomation. Patients will need to be monitored for several hours for signs of envenomation, which may include swelling, pain, ecchymosis, and indications of systemic manifestation (eg, weakness, dizziness, nausea, severe hypotension, thrombocytopenia).11 Viperidae venom hemorrhagic metalloproteinases act on capillary blood vessels by cleaving basement membrane proteins and allowing for extravasation of fluid into local tissue.12 The inflammatory response produced at the site of envenomation likely is due to the release of tumor necrosis factor á and endogenous matrix metalloprotein.12 There is a higher risk for death associated with bites from rattlesnakes within the Viperidae family because their venom contains a unique neurotoxin that works by blocking presynaptic junctions and causing a range of paralytic symptoms from ptosis to respiratory failure.13
The severity of Elapidae bites is thought to be related to the amount of venom injected, the size of the victim, and the length of the snake. Though clothing may offer protection, envenomation occurs in 75% of coral snake bites and can produce devastating consequences due to the venom content.14 In a retrospective study between 2002 and 2004, 90% of Elapidae snake bite patients (n=82) reported local pain, redness, and paresthesia, while around 7% developed systemic symptoms.15 Elapidae venom primarily is neurotoxic and is thought to spread via lymphatics.16 Delayed reactions are common and may take up to 12 hours to develop. Patients should be monitored, as local reactions may progress to weakness, fasciculations, extremity paralysis, and lastly, respiratory paralysis. Due to the risk for progression, all patients with likely coral snake bites should be given antivenin.8,15,17
Much like the North American coral snake, the venomous snake species Gloydius blomhoffii—referred to as the salmosa or mamushi snake depending on the region of origin (ie, Korea or Japan)—is a frequent source of devastating rural snake bites due to neurotoxins (Figure 5). The species’ slender fangs are thought to directly inject the snake’s potent venom, which contains hemorrhagic toxins and α-neurotoxins and Β-neurotoxins, into the bloodstream; however, the salmosa is considered a viper like the North American cottonmouth and copperhead because of its triangular head shape and hollow fangs, which allow for the accommodation of venom-containing glands and mechanism of venom injection. Salmosa venom shares both Viperidae and Elapidae characteristics. Cutaneous findings such as progressive edema, erythema, and bleeding frequently are reported and are attributed to the proteases and hemorrhagic toxins characteristic of vipers (Figure 6). α-Neurotoxins and Β-neurotoxins, similar to the proteolytic venom of the Elapidae family, are responsible for the unique visual disturbances (binocular diplopia) caused by the salmosa.12,18,19


Treatment
Treating snake bites begins with assessing the patient’s airway, breathing, and circulation, followed by a thorough medical and encounter history (including description of how the bite occurred). Due to the range of Viperidae symptoms, it generally is recommended that patients remove any restrictive clothing or jewelry near the bite and/or over the affected limb or body part, place the affected body part at the level of the heart, and go to the nearest medical facility for prompt care. Historically, empiric antibiotics often were used to prevent wound infections; however, studies have since demonstrated that antibiotics are not necessary and lack efficacy in uncomplicated snake bites.16,20 In a study of 114 pediatric cases from 1995 to 2005, it was determined that most patients could be managed with conservative treatment directed at pain management and swelling reduction via elevation of the affected extremity.6 While conservative management may be all that is needed to care for the majority of cases, one retrospective study from Texas indicated that 70% of pediatric venomous snake bites were treated with either intravenous antibiotics and/or antivenin, highlighting the variability in management and opportunity for improvement.21
Antivenin, specifically antivenin (Crotalidae) polyvalent, is the indicated treatment for Viperidae hemorrhagic or coagulopathic envenomation.13,22 Per guidelines from the World Health Organization, physical examination will yield a grading of the snake bite based on cutaneous findings. Grades III to V are considered moderate to severe and should be given antivenin.23 Physicians should look for signs of progressive injury and coagulopathy, such as increased swelling, bruising, hypotension, or altered mental status.22 Due to the major neurotoxic risks associated with Elapidae venom, all coral snake bites should be treated with antivenin; early intubation and ventilation may be considered.13 Similarly, patients who report a salmosa snake bite require prompt treatment with antivenin and/or cepharanthine, an additive agent to reduce swelling and pain.18 Due to the nature of the neurotoxins contained in the salmosa venom (α-neurotoxin causing postsynaptic inhibition of the neuromuscular junction and Β-neurotoxin inhibiting neurotransmitter release from the presynaptic terminal), anticholinesterases, which work by blocking the enzymatic breakdown of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, should not be used.19 While bleeding and skin and systemic changes may be reversed by antivenin, visual changes are unlikely to resolve with antivenin administration due to the presynaptic binding of Β-neurotoxin and the blockade of neuromuscular signaling.19
Antivenin should be administered intravenously for the fastest onset of action in a setting suitable for the management of anaphylaxis.24 In situations when the benefits may outweigh the risks (eg, if the patient has had a prior allergic reaction or is not in an environment where they can be watched for at least 8 hours for progression of envenomation or adverse reactions), premedication with an antihistamine or epinephrine may be considered.17 Per the World Allergy Organization and World Health Organization, adverse reactions should be treated with crystalloid solutions and antihistamines, corticosteroids, or epinephrine as indicated.25 In a qualitative analysis of emergency physicians’ attitudes toward antivenin, most expressed treatment hesitancy due to lack of knowledge and experience using the medication.26 When possible, snake bites should thus be managed in consultation with a toxicologist.2
Conclusion
Snake bites and envenomation occur commonly in the United States due to exposure to a variety of venomous snakes in the North American Viperidae and Elapidae families. Appropriate and successful management of snake bites by physicians requires general knowledge of regional snakes, the cutaneous and systemic manifestations of snake bites and envenomation, and current treatment methods.
- Greene SC, Folt J, Wyatt K, et al. Epidemiology of fatal snakebites in the United States 1981-2018. Am J Emerg Med. 2021;45:309-316.
- Wozniak EJ, Wisser J, Schwartz M. Venomous adversaries: a reference to snake identification, field safety, and bite-victim first aid for disaster-response personnel deploying into the hurricaneprone regions of North America. Wilderness Environ Med. 2006; 17:246-266.
- Gummin DD, Mowry JB, Beuhler MC, et al. 2021 annual report of National Poison Data System (NPDS) from America’s Poison Centers: 39th Annual Report. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2022;60:1381-1643.
- Chotai PN, Watlington J, Lewis S, et al. Pediatric snakebites: comparing patients in two geographic locations in the United States. J Surg Res. 2021;265:297-302.
- Johnson PN, McGoodwin L, Banner W Jr. Utilisation of Crotalidae polyvalent immune fab (ovine) for Viperidae envenomations in children. Emerg Med J. 2008;25:793-798.
- Tadros A, Sharon M, Davis S, et al. Emergency department visits by pediatric patients for snakebites. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2022; 38:279-282.
- Campbell BT, Corsi JM, Boneti C, et al. Pediatric snake bites: lessons learned from 114 cases. J Pediatr Surg. 2008;43:1338-1341.
- Peterson ME. Snake bites: coral snakes. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract. 2006;21:183-186.
- Porter KR. Herpetology. WB Saunders Company; 1972.
- Rana A, Kheora S. Grading and envenomation of the snake bite among the emergency cases in a medical college in rural India. Hmlyn Jr Appl Med Sci Res. 2021;2:33-36.
- Peterson ME. Snake bite: pit vipers. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract. 2006;21:174-182.
- Gutierrez JM, Rucavado A. Snake venom metalloproteinases: their role in the pathogenesis of local tissue damage. Biochimie. 2000;82:841-850.
- Weinstein SA, Dart RC, Staples A, et al. Envenomations: an overview of clinical toxicology for the primary care physician. Am Fam Physician. 2009;80:793-802.
- Kitchens CS, Van Mierop LH. Envenomation by the eastern coral snake (Micrurus fulvius fulvius): a study of 39 victims. JAMA. 1987;258:1615-1618.
- Morgan DL, Borys DJ, Stanford R, et al. Texas coral snake (Micrurus tener) bites. South Med J. 2007;100:152-156.
- Clark RF, Delden BS, Furbee B. The incidence of wound infection following crotalid envenomation. J Emerg Med. 1993; 11:583-586.
- Gold BS, Dart RC, Barish RA. Bites of venomous snakes. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:347-356.
- Hifumi T, Sakai A, Kondo Y, et al. Venomous snake bites: clinical diagnosis and treatment. J Intensive Care. 2015;3:16.
- Igari R, Iseki K, Abe S, et al. Binocular diplopia and ptosis due to snake bite (Agkistrodon blomhoffi “mamushi”) case report. Brain Nerve. 2010;62:273-277.
- Kerrigan KR, Mertz BL, Nelson SJ, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis for pit viper envenomation: prospective, controlled trial. World J Surg. 1997;21:369-372.
- Correa JA, Fallon SC, Cruz AT, et al. Management of pediatric snake bites: are we doing too much? J Pediatr Surg. 2014;49:1009-1015.
- Dart RC, McNally J. Efficacy, safety and use of snake antivenoms in the United States. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;47:181-188.
- World Health Organization Regional Office for South-East Asia. Guidelines for the Management of Snakebites. 2nd ed. World Health Organization; 2016.
- Clark RF, McKinney PE, Chase PB, et al. Immediate and delayed allergic reactions to Crotalidae polyvalent immune Fab (ovine) antivenom. Ann Emerg Med. 2002;39:671-676.
- World Health Organization. WHO Guidelines for the production, control, and regulation of snake antivenom immunoglobulins. Accessed November 25, 2024. https://extranet.who.int/prequal/vaccines/guidelines-production-control-and-regulation-snake-antivenom-immunoglobulins
- Tupetz A, Barcenas LK, Phillips AJ, et al. Bites study: a qualitive analysis among emergency medicine physicians on snake envenomation management practices. PloS One. 2022;17:E0262215.
North American venomous snakes traditionally are classified as members of either the Viperidae (eg, rattlesnakes, copperheads, cottonmouths) or Elapidae (eg, coral snakes) families and account for roughly 5000 to 10,000 reported envenomations annually.1,2 In 2021, America’s Poison Centers reported 2287 calls related to copperheads, 71 related to coral snakes, 229 related to cottonmouths, 1184 related to rattlesnakes, and 524 related to unknown snakes.3 The majority of calls related to snake bites were for adult patients, resulting in absent to minor outcomes. Only 1 death due to a rattlesnake bite was reported.3 Death by envenomation from a North American snake species is considered rare and typically is attributed to a lapse in medical attention; however, rattlesnakes are the most common reported cause of death by snake envenomation (Figure 1).1,3 A study comparing snake bites and hospital stays in the southeast vs southwest United States found that the southeast had the highest incidence of copperhead bites (37%), while the southwest had a higher incidence of rattlesnake bites (70%); those who were bitten by a rattlesnake were reported to have more severe symptoms and greater need for medical attention and antivenin.4 Some reports have linked pediatric and elderly patients to worse outcomes.5 However, one study examining 24,388 emergency department visits for snake bites from 2006 through 2014 found that the majority of pediatric cases were handled by non– trauma centers in the southern United States,6 supporting evidence found by Campbell et al7 indicating that most snake bites in children can be managed with conservative care. Though reported complications—including weakness, paralysis, hypovolemic shock, thrombocytopenia, and death—from North American venomous snake bites are low, they are still considered a medical emergency.8 It is essential for physicians to understand the clinical manifestations and treatment of North American venomous snake bites and to educate patients on how to protect themselves against and avoid provoking snakes, particularly in rural areas.2 In this article, we review the characteristics of common North American venomous snakes and the clinical manifestations of their bites. We also discuss the appropriate measures for staging, evaluating, and treating snake envenomation to improve patient management and care.

Features of North American Venomous Snakes
Individual snakes within the Viperidae family vary in size, markings and coloration, activity, and region, and physicians should consult their local health departments regarding snakes that are common in their area.2 Cottonmouth snakes are semiaquatic and traditionally are found within the southern and central United States. With a spade-shaped head and distinct two-tone coloration, cottonmouths may be mistaken for other nonvenomous water snakes in these regions (Figure 2).2 Copperheads, true to their name, are red in color; they inhabit a large portion of the southeastern United States and eastern Texas regions and are the cause of the majority of venomous snake bites in North America (Figure 3). Both cottonmouths and copperheads are believed to bite and envenomate as a defensive mechanism when provoked.


Coral snakes, found in the eastern United States and Texas regions, are the only subspecies of the Elapidae family (Figure 4).2,9 They can be distinguished from the nonvenomous milk snake by their characteristic banding, as coral snakes are patterned in a red-yellow-black band sequence and milk snakes are patterned in a red-black-yellow or white sequence. The differences in appearance of these snakes often is remembered by the phrase “red on yellow kills a fellow.”

Anatomic differences between the Viperidae and Elapidae families, including fang size, placement, and type, as well as venom composition, are directly linked to clinical manifestations of the bites. Viperidae fangs extend from the maxillary bones and are mobile, long, and hollow, making it easy for the snake to control fang movement and envenomation.9 Viperidae snakes are uniquely capable of inflicting puncture wounds without the injection of venom, known as dry bites. In contrast, Elapidae snakes have short, hollow, and fixed fangs, and thus patients can protect themselves by wearing appropriate clothing and covered footwear.9 Currently, identifying the type of snake responsible for the bite relies on visualization of the snake and/or the identification of clinical symptoms of envenomation by a dermatologist.
Clinical Manifestations of Venomous Snake Bites
Clinical manifestations and cutaneous findings often are used to grade the severity of venomous snake bites as well as to dictate treatment procedures. Grade 0 indicates a bite has occurred without envenomation, while grades I to V describe the progression and severity of envenomation.10 Grade I describes minimal erythema and edema around the site (fang marks may or may not be present) and no systemic symptoms. Grade II describes erythema and edema extending up the extremity to the first joint (eg, hand to wrist), pain, some systemic symptoms if there is rapid progression, and potential bleeding at the site. Grade III describes erythema and edema spreading to the second joint in the extremity, pain, and systemic symptoms, including coagulation defects. Grade IV describes erythema and edema of the whole extremity, a rapid reaction and progression following the bite, and risk for compartment syndrome. Grade V includes erythema and edema beyond the extremity and increasing systemic symptoms.10
Local pain and edema, usually on easily accessible or exposed extremities, are the most common clinical symptoms reported following a Viperidae snake bite.11 Due to their capability of producing a dry bite, puncture markings alone do not indicate envenomation. Patients will need to be monitored for several hours for signs of envenomation, which may include swelling, pain, ecchymosis, and indications of systemic manifestation (eg, weakness, dizziness, nausea, severe hypotension, thrombocytopenia).11 Viperidae venom hemorrhagic metalloproteinases act on capillary blood vessels by cleaving basement membrane proteins and allowing for extravasation of fluid into local tissue.12 The inflammatory response produced at the site of envenomation likely is due to the release of tumor necrosis factor á and endogenous matrix metalloprotein.12 There is a higher risk for death associated with bites from rattlesnakes within the Viperidae family because their venom contains a unique neurotoxin that works by blocking presynaptic junctions and causing a range of paralytic symptoms from ptosis to respiratory failure.13
The severity of Elapidae bites is thought to be related to the amount of venom injected, the size of the victim, and the length of the snake. Though clothing may offer protection, envenomation occurs in 75% of coral snake bites and can produce devastating consequences due to the venom content.14 In a retrospective study between 2002 and 2004, 90% of Elapidae snake bite patients (n=82) reported local pain, redness, and paresthesia, while around 7% developed systemic symptoms.15 Elapidae venom primarily is neurotoxic and is thought to spread via lymphatics.16 Delayed reactions are common and may take up to 12 hours to develop. Patients should be monitored, as local reactions may progress to weakness, fasciculations, extremity paralysis, and lastly, respiratory paralysis. Due to the risk for progression, all patients with likely coral snake bites should be given antivenin.8,15,17
Much like the North American coral snake, the venomous snake species Gloydius blomhoffii—referred to as the salmosa or mamushi snake depending on the region of origin (ie, Korea or Japan)—is a frequent source of devastating rural snake bites due to neurotoxins (Figure 5). The species’ slender fangs are thought to directly inject the snake’s potent venom, which contains hemorrhagic toxins and α-neurotoxins and Β-neurotoxins, into the bloodstream; however, the salmosa is considered a viper like the North American cottonmouth and copperhead because of its triangular head shape and hollow fangs, which allow for the accommodation of venom-containing glands and mechanism of venom injection. Salmosa venom shares both Viperidae and Elapidae characteristics. Cutaneous findings such as progressive edema, erythema, and bleeding frequently are reported and are attributed to the proteases and hemorrhagic toxins characteristic of vipers (Figure 6). α-Neurotoxins and Β-neurotoxins, similar to the proteolytic venom of the Elapidae family, are responsible for the unique visual disturbances (binocular diplopia) caused by the salmosa.12,18,19


Treatment
Treating snake bites begins with assessing the patient’s airway, breathing, and circulation, followed by a thorough medical and encounter history (including description of how the bite occurred). Due to the range of Viperidae symptoms, it generally is recommended that patients remove any restrictive clothing or jewelry near the bite and/or over the affected limb or body part, place the affected body part at the level of the heart, and go to the nearest medical facility for prompt care. Historically, empiric antibiotics often were used to prevent wound infections; however, studies have since demonstrated that antibiotics are not necessary and lack efficacy in uncomplicated snake bites.16,20 In a study of 114 pediatric cases from 1995 to 2005, it was determined that most patients could be managed with conservative treatment directed at pain management and swelling reduction via elevation of the affected extremity.6 While conservative management may be all that is needed to care for the majority of cases, one retrospective study from Texas indicated that 70% of pediatric venomous snake bites were treated with either intravenous antibiotics and/or antivenin, highlighting the variability in management and opportunity for improvement.21
Antivenin, specifically antivenin (Crotalidae) polyvalent, is the indicated treatment for Viperidae hemorrhagic or coagulopathic envenomation.13,22 Per guidelines from the World Health Organization, physical examination will yield a grading of the snake bite based on cutaneous findings. Grades III to V are considered moderate to severe and should be given antivenin.23 Physicians should look for signs of progressive injury and coagulopathy, such as increased swelling, bruising, hypotension, or altered mental status.22 Due to the major neurotoxic risks associated with Elapidae venom, all coral snake bites should be treated with antivenin; early intubation and ventilation may be considered.13 Similarly, patients who report a salmosa snake bite require prompt treatment with antivenin and/or cepharanthine, an additive agent to reduce swelling and pain.18 Due to the nature of the neurotoxins contained in the salmosa venom (α-neurotoxin causing postsynaptic inhibition of the neuromuscular junction and Β-neurotoxin inhibiting neurotransmitter release from the presynaptic terminal), anticholinesterases, which work by blocking the enzymatic breakdown of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, should not be used.19 While bleeding and skin and systemic changes may be reversed by antivenin, visual changes are unlikely to resolve with antivenin administration due to the presynaptic binding of Β-neurotoxin and the blockade of neuromuscular signaling.19
Antivenin should be administered intravenously for the fastest onset of action in a setting suitable for the management of anaphylaxis.24 In situations when the benefits may outweigh the risks (eg, if the patient has had a prior allergic reaction or is not in an environment where they can be watched for at least 8 hours for progression of envenomation or adverse reactions), premedication with an antihistamine or epinephrine may be considered.17 Per the World Allergy Organization and World Health Organization, adverse reactions should be treated with crystalloid solutions and antihistamines, corticosteroids, or epinephrine as indicated.25 In a qualitative analysis of emergency physicians’ attitudes toward antivenin, most expressed treatment hesitancy due to lack of knowledge and experience using the medication.26 When possible, snake bites should thus be managed in consultation with a toxicologist.2
Conclusion
Snake bites and envenomation occur commonly in the United States due to exposure to a variety of venomous snakes in the North American Viperidae and Elapidae families. Appropriate and successful management of snake bites by physicians requires general knowledge of regional snakes, the cutaneous and systemic manifestations of snake bites and envenomation, and current treatment methods.
North American venomous snakes traditionally are classified as members of either the Viperidae (eg, rattlesnakes, copperheads, cottonmouths) or Elapidae (eg, coral snakes) families and account for roughly 5000 to 10,000 reported envenomations annually.1,2 In 2021, America’s Poison Centers reported 2287 calls related to copperheads, 71 related to coral snakes, 229 related to cottonmouths, 1184 related to rattlesnakes, and 524 related to unknown snakes.3 The majority of calls related to snake bites were for adult patients, resulting in absent to minor outcomes. Only 1 death due to a rattlesnake bite was reported.3 Death by envenomation from a North American snake species is considered rare and typically is attributed to a lapse in medical attention; however, rattlesnakes are the most common reported cause of death by snake envenomation (Figure 1).1,3 A study comparing snake bites and hospital stays in the southeast vs southwest United States found that the southeast had the highest incidence of copperhead bites (37%), while the southwest had a higher incidence of rattlesnake bites (70%); those who were bitten by a rattlesnake were reported to have more severe symptoms and greater need for medical attention and antivenin.4 Some reports have linked pediatric and elderly patients to worse outcomes.5 However, one study examining 24,388 emergency department visits for snake bites from 2006 through 2014 found that the majority of pediatric cases were handled by non– trauma centers in the southern United States,6 supporting evidence found by Campbell et al7 indicating that most snake bites in children can be managed with conservative care. Though reported complications—including weakness, paralysis, hypovolemic shock, thrombocytopenia, and death—from North American venomous snake bites are low, they are still considered a medical emergency.8 It is essential for physicians to understand the clinical manifestations and treatment of North American venomous snake bites and to educate patients on how to protect themselves against and avoid provoking snakes, particularly in rural areas.2 In this article, we review the characteristics of common North American venomous snakes and the clinical manifestations of their bites. We also discuss the appropriate measures for staging, evaluating, and treating snake envenomation to improve patient management and care.

Features of North American Venomous Snakes
Individual snakes within the Viperidae family vary in size, markings and coloration, activity, and region, and physicians should consult their local health departments regarding snakes that are common in their area.2 Cottonmouth snakes are semiaquatic and traditionally are found within the southern and central United States. With a spade-shaped head and distinct two-tone coloration, cottonmouths may be mistaken for other nonvenomous water snakes in these regions (Figure 2).2 Copperheads, true to their name, are red in color; they inhabit a large portion of the southeastern United States and eastern Texas regions and are the cause of the majority of venomous snake bites in North America (Figure 3). Both cottonmouths and copperheads are believed to bite and envenomate as a defensive mechanism when provoked.


Coral snakes, found in the eastern United States and Texas regions, are the only subspecies of the Elapidae family (Figure 4).2,9 They can be distinguished from the nonvenomous milk snake by their characteristic banding, as coral snakes are patterned in a red-yellow-black band sequence and milk snakes are patterned in a red-black-yellow or white sequence. The differences in appearance of these snakes often is remembered by the phrase “red on yellow kills a fellow.”

Anatomic differences between the Viperidae and Elapidae families, including fang size, placement, and type, as well as venom composition, are directly linked to clinical manifestations of the bites. Viperidae fangs extend from the maxillary bones and are mobile, long, and hollow, making it easy for the snake to control fang movement and envenomation.9 Viperidae snakes are uniquely capable of inflicting puncture wounds without the injection of venom, known as dry bites. In contrast, Elapidae snakes have short, hollow, and fixed fangs, and thus patients can protect themselves by wearing appropriate clothing and covered footwear.9 Currently, identifying the type of snake responsible for the bite relies on visualization of the snake and/or the identification of clinical symptoms of envenomation by a dermatologist.
Clinical Manifestations of Venomous Snake Bites
Clinical manifestations and cutaneous findings often are used to grade the severity of venomous snake bites as well as to dictate treatment procedures. Grade 0 indicates a bite has occurred without envenomation, while grades I to V describe the progression and severity of envenomation.10 Grade I describes minimal erythema and edema around the site (fang marks may or may not be present) and no systemic symptoms. Grade II describes erythema and edema extending up the extremity to the first joint (eg, hand to wrist), pain, some systemic symptoms if there is rapid progression, and potential bleeding at the site. Grade III describes erythema and edema spreading to the second joint in the extremity, pain, and systemic symptoms, including coagulation defects. Grade IV describes erythema and edema of the whole extremity, a rapid reaction and progression following the bite, and risk for compartment syndrome. Grade V includes erythema and edema beyond the extremity and increasing systemic symptoms.10
Local pain and edema, usually on easily accessible or exposed extremities, are the most common clinical symptoms reported following a Viperidae snake bite.11 Due to their capability of producing a dry bite, puncture markings alone do not indicate envenomation. Patients will need to be monitored for several hours for signs of envenomation, which may include swelling, pain, ecchymosis, and indications of systemic manifestation (eg, weakness, dizziness, nausea, severe hypotension, thrombocytopenia).11 Viperidae venom hemorrhagic metalloproteinases act on capillary blood vessels by cleaving basement membrane proteins and allowing for extravasation of fluid into local tissue.12 The inflammatory response produced at the site of envenomation likely is due to the release of tumor necrosis factor á and endogenous matrix metalloprotein.12 There is a higher risk for death associated with bites from rattlesnakes within the Viperidae family because their venom contains a unique neurotoxin that works by blocking presynaptic junctions and causing a range of paralytic symptoms from ptosis to respiratory failure.13
The severity of Elapidae bites is thought to be related to the amount of venom injected, the size of the victim, and the length of the snake. Though clothing may offer protection, envenomation occurs in 75% of coral snake bites and can produce devastating consequences due to the venom content.14 In a retrospective study between 2002 and 2004, 90% of Elapidae snake bite patients (n=82) reported local pain, redness, and paresthesia, while around 7% developed systemic symptoms.15 Elapidae venom primarily is neurotoxic and is thought to spread via lymphatics.16 Delayed reactions are common and may take up to 12 hours to develop. Patients should be monitored, as local reactions may progress to weakness, fasciculations, extremity paralysis, and lastly, respiratory paralysis. Due to the risk for progression, all patients with likely coral snake bites should be given antivenin.8,15,17
Much like the North American coral snake, the venomous snake species Gloydius blomhoffii—referred to as the salmosa or mamushi snake depending on the region of origin (ie, Korea or Japan)—is a frequent source of devastating rural snake bites due to neurotoxins (Figure 5). The species’ slender fangs are thought to directly inject the snake’s potent venom, which contains hemorrhagic toxins and α-neurotoxins and Β-neurotoxins, into the bloodstream; however, the salmosa is considered a viper like the North American cottonmouth and copperhead because of its triangular head shape and hollow fangs, which allow for the accommodation of venom-containing glands and mechanism of venom injection. Salmosa venom shares both Viperidae and Elapidae characteristics. Cutaneous findings such as progressive edema, erythema, and bleeding frequently are reported and are attributed to the proteases and hemorrhagic toxins characteristic of vipers (Figure 6). α-Neurotoxins and Β-neurotoxins, similar to the proteolytic venom of the Elapidae family, are responsible for the unique visual disturbances (binocular diplopia) caused by the salmosa.12,18,19


Treatment
Treating snake bites begins with assessing the patient’s airway, breathing, and circulation, followed by a thorough medical and encounter history (including description of how the bite occurred). Due to the range of Viperidae symptoms, it generally is recommended that patients remove any restrictive clothing or jewelry near the bite and/or over the affected limb or body part, place the affected body part at the level of the heart, and go to the nearest medical facility for prompt care. Historically, empiric antibiotics often were used to prevent wound infections; however, studies have since demonstrated that antibiotics are not necessary and lack efficacy in uncomplicated snake bites.16,20 In a study of 114 pediatric cases from 1995 to 2005, it was determined that most patients could be managed with conservative treatment directed at pain management and swelling reduction via elevation of the affected extremity.6 While conservative management may be all that is needed to care for the majority of cases, one retrospective study from Texas indicated that 70% of pediatric venomous snake bites were treated with either intravenous antibiotics and/or antivenin, highlighting the variability in management and opportunity for improvement.21
Antivenin, specifically antivenin (Crotalidae) polyvalent, is the indicated treatment for Viperidae hemorrhagic or coagulopathic envenomation.13,22 Per guidelines from the World Health Organization, physical examination will yield a grading of the snake bite based on cutaneous findings. Grades III to V are considered moderate to severe and should be given antivenin.23 Physicians should look for signs of progressive injury and coagulopathy, such as increased swelling, bruising, hypotension, or altered mental status.22 Due to the major neurotoxic risks associated with Elapidae venom, all coral snake bites should be treated with antivenin; early intubation and ventilation may be considered.13 Similarly, patients who report a salmosa snake bite require prompt treatment with antivenin and/or cepharanthine, an additive agent to reduce swelling and pain.18 Due to the nature of the neurotoxins contained in the salmosa venom (α-neurotoxin causing postsynaptic inhibition of the neuromuscular junction and Β-neurotoxin inhibiting neurotransmitter release from the presynaptic terminal), anticholinesterases, which work by blocking the enzymatic breakdown of the neurotransmitter acetylcholine, should not be used.19 While bleeding and skin and systemic changes may be reversed by antivenin, visual changes are unlikely to resolve with antivenin administration due to the presynaptic binding of Β-neurotoxin and the blockade of neuromuscular signaling.19
Antivenin should be administered intravenously for the fastest onset of action in a setting suitable for the management of anaphylaxis.24 In situations when the benefits may outweigh the risks (eg, if the patient has had a prior allergic reaction or is not in an environment where they can be watched for at least 8 hours for progression of envenomation or adverse reactions), premedication with an antihistamine or epinephrine may be considered.17 Per the World Allergy Organization and World Health Organization, adverse reactions should be treated with crystalloid solutions and antihistamines, corticosteroids, or epinephrine as indicated.25 In a qualitative analysis of emergency physicians’ attitudes toward antivenin, most expressed treatment hesitancy due to lack of knowledge and experience using the medication.26 When possible, snake bites should thus be managed in consultation with a toxicologist.2
Conclusion
Snake bites and envenomation occur commonly in the United States due to exposure to a variety of venomous snakes in the North American Viperidae and Elapidae families. Appropriate and successful management of snake bites by physicians requires general knowledge of regional snakes, the cutaneous and systemic manifestations of snake bites and envenomation, and current treatment methods.
- Greene SC, Folt J, Wyatt K, et al. Epidemiology of fatal snakebites in the United States 1981-2018. Am J Emerg Med. 2021;45:309-316.
- Wozniak EJ, Wisser J, Schwartz M. Venomous adversaries: a reference to snake identification, field safety, and bite-victim first aid for disaster-response personnel deploying into the hurricaneprone regions of North America. Wilderness Environ Med. 2006; 17:246-266.
- Gummin DD, Mowry JB, Beuhler MC, et al. 2021 annual report of National Poison Data System (NPDS) from America’s Poison Centers: 39th Annual Report. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2022;60:1381-1643.
- Chotai PN, Watlington J, Lewis S, et al. Pediatric snakebites: comparing patients in two geographic locations in the United States. J Surg Res. 2021;265:297-302.
- Johnson PN, McGoodwin L, Banner W Jr. Utilisation of Crotalidae polyvalent immune fab (ovine) for Viperidae envenomations in children. Emerg Med J. 2008;25:793-798.
- Tadros A, Sharon M, Davis S, et al. Emergency department visits by pediatric patients for snakebites. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2022; 38:279-282.
- Campbell BT, Corsi JM, Boneti C, et al. Pediatric snake bites: lessons learned from 114 cases. J Pediatr Surg. 2008;43:1338-1341.
- Peterson ME. Snake bites: coral snakes. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract. 2006;21:183-186.
- Porter KR. Herpetology. WB Saunders Company; 1972.
- Rana A, Kheora S. Grading and envenomation of the snake bite among the emergency cases in a medical college in rural India. Hmlyn Jr Appl Med Sci Res. 2021;2:33-36.
- Peterson ME. Snake bite: pit vipers. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract. 2006;21:174-182.
- Gutierrez JM, Rucavado A. Snake venom metalloproteinases: their role in the pathogenesis of local tissue damage. Biochimie. 2000;82:841-850.
- Weinstein SA, Dart RC, Staples A, et al. Envenomations: an overview of clinical toxicology for the primary care physician. Am Fam Physician. 2009;80:793-802.
- Kitchens CS, Van Mierop LH. Envenomation by the eastern coral snake (Micrurus fulvius fulvius): a study of 39 victims. JAMA. 1987;258:1615-1618.
- Morgan DL, Borys DJ, Stanford R, et al. Texas coral snake (Micrurus tener) bites. South Med J. 2007;100:152-156.
- Clark RF, Delden BS, Furbee B. The incidence of wound infection following crotalid envenomation. J Emerg Med. 1993; 11:583-586.
- Gold BS, Dart RC, Barish RA. Bites of venomous snakes. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:347-356.
- Hifumi T, Sakai A, Kondo Y, et al. Venomous snake bites: clinical diagnosis and treatment. J Intensive Care. 2015;3:16.
- Igari R, Iseki K, Abe S, et al. Binocular diplopia and ptosis due to snake bite (Agkistrodon blomhoffi “mamushi”) case report. Brain Nerve. 2010;62:273-277.
- Kerrigan KR, Mertz BL, Nelson SJ, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis for pit viper envenomation: prospective, controlled trial. World J Surg. 1997;21:369-372.
- Correa JA, Fallon SC, Cruz AT, et al. Management of pediatric snake bites: are we doing too much? J Pediatr Surg. 2014;49:1009-1015.
- Dart RC, McNally J. Efficacy, safety and use of snake antivenoms in the United States. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;47:181-188.
- World Health Organization Regional Office for South-East Asia. Guidelines for the Management of Snakebites. 2nd ed. World Health Organization; 2016.
- Clark RF, McKinney PE, Chase PB, et al. Immediate and delayed allergic reactions to Crotalidae polyvalent immune Fab (ovine) antivenom. Ann Emerg Med. 2002;39:671-676.
- World Health Organization. WHO Guidelines for the production, control, and regulation of snake antivenom immunoglobulins. Accessed November 25, 2024. https://extranet.who.int/prequal/vaccines/guidelines-production-control-and-regulation-snake-antivenom-immunoglobulins
- Tupetz A, Barcenas LK, Phillips AJ, et al. Bites study: a qualitive analysis among emergency medicine physicians on snake envenomation management practices. PloS One. 2022;17:E0262215.
- Greene SC, Folt J, Wyatt K, et al. Epidemiology of fatal snakebites in the United States 1981-2018. Am J Emerg Med. 2021;45:309-316.
- Wozniak EJ, Wisser J, Schwartz M. Venomous adversaries: a reference to snake identification, field safety, and bite-victim first aid for disaster-response personnel deploying into the hurricaneprone regions of North America. Wilderness Environ Med. 2006; 17:246-266.
- Gummin DD, Mowry JB, Beuhler MC, et al. 2021 annual report of National Poison Data System (NPDS) from America’s Poison Centers: 39th Annual Report. Clin Toxicol (Phila). 2022;60:1381-1643.
- Chotai PN, Watlington J, Lewis S, et al. Pediatric snakebites: comparing patients in two geographic locations in the United States. J Surg Res. 2021;265:297-302.
- Johnson PN, McGoodwin L, Banner W Jr. Utilisation of Crotalidae polyvalent immune fab (ovine) for Viperidae envenomations in children. Emerg Med J. 2008;25:793-798.
- Tadros A, Sharon M, Davis S, et al. Emergency department visits by pediatric patients for snakebites. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2022; 38:279-282.
- Campbell BT, Corsi JM, Boneti C, et al. Pediatric snake bites: lessons learned from 114 cases. J Pediatr Surg. 2008;43:1338-1341.
- Peterson ME. Snake bites: coral snakes. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract. 2006;21:183-186.
- Porter KR. Herpetology. WB Saunders Company; 1972.
- Rana A, Kheora S. Grading and envenomation of the snake bite among the emergency cases in a medical college in rural India. Hmlyn Jr Appl Med Sci Res. 2021;2:33-36.
- Peterson ME. Snake bite: pit vipers. Clin Tech Small Anim Pract. 2006;21:174-182.
- Gutierrez JM, Rucavado A. Snake venom metalloproteinases: their role in the pathogenesis of local tissue damage. Biochimie. 2000;82:841-850.
- Weinstein SA, Dart RC, Staples A, et al. Envenomations: an overview of clinical toxicology for the primary care physician. Am Fam Physician. 2009;80:793-802.
- Kitchens CS, Van Mierop LH. Envenomation by the eastern coral snake (Micrurus fulvius fulvius): a study of 39 victims. JAMA. 1987;258:1615-1618.
- Morgan DL, Borys DJ, Stanford R, et al. Texas coral snake (Micrurus tener) bites. South Med J. 2007;100:152-156.
- Clark RF, Delden BS, Furbee B. The incidence of wound infection following crotalid envenomation. J Emerg Med. 1993; 11:583-586.
- Gold BS, Dart RC, Barish RA. Bites of venomous snakes. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:347-356.
- Hifumi T, Sakai A, Kondo Y, et al. Venomous snake bites: clinical diagnosis and treatment. J Intensive Care. 2015;3:16.
- Igari R, Iseki K, Abe S, et al. Binocular diplopia and ptosis due to snake bite (Agkistrodon blomhoffi “mamushi”) case report. Brain Nerve. 2010;62:273-277.
- Kerrigan KR, Mertz BL, Nelson SJ, et al. Antibiotic prophylaxis for pit viper envenomation: prospective, controlled trial. World J Surg. 1997;21:369-372.
- Correa JA, Fallon SC, Cruz AT, et al. Management of pediatric snake bites: are we doing too much? J Pediatr Surg. 2014;49:1009-1015.
- Dart RC, McNally J. Efficacy, safety and use of snake antivenoms in the United States. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;47:181-188.
- World Health Organization Regional Office for South-East Asia. Guidelines for the Management of Snakebites. 2nd ed. World Health Organization; 2016.
- Clark RF, McKinney PE, Chase PB, et al. Immediate and delayed allergic reactions to Crotalidae polyvalent immune Fab (ovine) antivenom. Ann Emerg Med. 2002;39:671-676.
- World Health Organization. WHO Guidelines for the production, control, and regulation of snake antivenom immunoglobulins. Accessed November 25, 2024. https://extranet.who.int/prequal/vaccines/guidelines-production-control-and-regulation-snake-antivenom-immunoglobulins
- Tupetz A, Barcenas LK, Phillips AJ, et al. Bites study: a qualitive analysis among emergency medicine physicians on snake envenomation management practices. PloS One. 2022;17:E0262215.
Key Features of North American Venomous Snake Bites
Key Features of North American Venomous Snake Bites
PRACTICE POINTS
- Venomous snake bites require prompt medical attention and assessment of symptoms to determine the optimal course of management and need for antivenin.
- Envenomation may cause may cause discoloration and swelling of the skin as well as thrombotic or paralytic changes.
Buruli Ulcer Transmission: Environmental Pathways and Implications for Dermatologic Care
Buruli Ulcer Transmission: Environmental Pathways and Implications for Dermatologic Care
Buruli ulcer (BU) is a potentially disabling necrotizing skin and soft tissue disease caused by Mycobacterium ulcerans infection.1,2 Buruli ulcer is most common in hot and humid climates and has caused considerable morbidity in Western African countries (Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, and Benin account for 73% of annual cases) and the temperate areas of Australia (283 reported cases in 2017).1-4 In fact, the first recognizable cases of BU were described in 6 Australian individuals living in a riverine area in 1948, although the term Buruli ulcer is derived from the increased number of cases reported from Buruli county in Uganda near the Nile River.1,3,4
From 2002 to 2017, 66,000 cases of BU were reported in 33 countries.1 While the focal distribution has been demonstrated in the tropical areas of Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Peru, and Mexico,4 nontropical nations such as Japan also are affected. Since 1981, 66 cases have been reported in Japan with M ulcerans subspecies—primarily Shinshuense, which has adapted to higher latitudes.1 Herein, we provide an overview of the pathogenesis, clinical presentation, and treatment of BU and highlight aquatic insects and mosquitoes as possible vectors of transmission.
Pathogenesis
Mycobacterium ulcerans is a nontuberculous mycobacterium and ubiquitous acid-fast gram-positive bacillus that can be cultured using a Lowenstein-Jensen agar and has a doubling rate of 48 hours.1,5 It produces the small 174-kb plasmid pMUM001-encoded compound mycolactone, a pathogenic toxin that causes immunosuppression, analgesia, and cytotoxic-associated tissue necrosis.1,5-9
Mycolactone is a polyketide macrolide with a 12-membrane lactone with 2 attached acyl side chains.1,7 Mycolactone is synthesized by the giant polyketide synthetases of M ulcerans. Mycolactone post-transcriptionally inhibits the development of lipopolysaccharide-dependent proinflammatory mediators—specifically by blocking protein translocation from the cytosol into the endoplasmic reticulum by targeting the SEC61 translocon.1,6 The lack of translocation of 30% to 50% of proteins leads to cellular stress and apoptosis mediated by Bim/Bcl2. A single point mutation in the SEC61 translocon subunit alpha 1 gene (SEC61A1) is associated with resistance to the cytotoxic effects of mycolactone.1
There are divergent hypotheses regarding the relationship of mycolactone to the Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein, with some researchers suggesting that mycolactone can attach to this protein, leading to cell detachment and death.7 However, others have proposed that mycolactone inhibits mTOR, activating the Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein and leading to subsequent extensive cytoskeleton remodeling.1 Mycolactone also can cause hypoesthesia, either by activating type 2 angiotensin II receptors and creating downstream neuron hyperpolarization or by killing Schwann cells.1
Transmission
Buruli ulcer caused by M ulcerans has a poorly understood transmission mechanism, and further studies are required to understand the underlying pathophysiology to decrease transmission rates and associated morbidity. Buruli ulcer is widely accepted to be transmitted to humans via predominantly water-rich environments; most cases occur around slow-moving and still bodies of water such as swamps, ponds, and marshes.1 Mycobacterium ulcerans DNA has been found in fish, water insects, and snails.1,4 It also has been present in samples from aquatic insects such as Hemiptera (water strider), Naucoridae (creeping water bugs and saucer bugs), and Belostomatidae (giant water bugs) in West Africa and also from Aulacodes feces and moss.1
Variations in geographic climate may lead to different modes of transmission of BU. For example, mosquitoes have been studied as a potential vector for BU in the temperate climate of Australia.2 However, more data are needed from other countries to support mosquitoes as possible vectors. Wallace et al10 performed a study that showed skin puncture from insect bites or other injuries increases the chance of transmitting M ulcerans in the environment to the skin.
Clinical Presentation
Buruli ulcer most often manifests in healthy children younger than 15 years.1,8 Potential risk factors include residing near a contaminated water source, swimming in a river, and being bitten by an insect in a river during the rainy season. Lack of protective clothing and mosquito nets also have been proposed as considerable risk factors for BU.2 Genetic polymorphism in the solute carrier family 11 member 1 gene (SLC11A1) may increase the risk for BU with M ulcerans transmission. It is essential to understand that infection with M ulcerans does not always lead to the development of BU.1
Buruli ulcer often begins as a painless nodule or papule that patients may confuse with an insect bite. Within a couple of weeks, the induration will grow into ill-defined edematous plaques that gradually turn into necrotic skin, which will eventually slough off to create painless to mildly painful irregular skin ulceration (Figure).11 The surrounding uninvolved skin often is edematous and pigmented. Unfortunately, deep ulcerations can lead to osteomyelitis with exposure of the underlying bone. A secondary bacterial infection may be involved if a foul smell accompanies the ulcer. The vast extension of the ulcer has been known to lead to amputations, contractures, or deformities.1-5 The nodule progression to ulceration varies and can occur within 3 weeks to 1 year of the initial exposure.1,8
skin, which will eventually slough off to create painless to mildly painful
irregular skin ulceration. The image is in the public domain. Ezzedine K,
Pistone T, Cottin J, et al. Buruli ulcer in long-term traveler to Senegal.
Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15:118-119. doi:10.3201/eid1501.080123
The World Health Organization (WHO) classifies BU into 3 categories: category 1 includes ulcers less than 5 cm in diameter; category 2 involves ulcers that are 5 to 15 cm in diameter; and category 3 involves ulcers that are larger than 15 cm in diameter as well as those involving the breasts, genitals, eyes, bones, or joints.4,8
Diagnosis
Cultures and microscopic examination of M ulcerans acid-fast bacilli can be used to confirm the diagnosis of BU. However, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the best confirmatory test, as the WHO reports that 70% of reported cases of BU are confirmed by PCR detection of DNA.1,4 Unfortunately, many BU-endemic areas lack feasible access to perform confirmatory tests such as PCR. Antigen detection assays, loop-mediated isothermal amplification tests, and detection of mycolactone by thinlayer chromatography are being developed to create more rapid and sensitive testing for BU.12
The lack of diagnostic testing for BU means physicians must rely on clinical diagnosis.1 However, the differential diagnosis is extensive and includes ulcers due to diabetes and arterial and venous insufficiency, cutaneous leishmaniasis, and Haemophilus ducreyi ulcers.5 Despite the broad differential, Eddyani et al12 found that BU diagnosed clinically by physicians had a sensitivity of 92%.
Treatment
Surgery was the first-line treatment for BU before the introduction of antibiotics for this condition. Antibiotics have created better outcomes with increased cure rates and decreased amputation.4
Pharmacotherapy—In the early 2000s, the WHO recommended a treatment regimen of once-daily 10 mg/kg rifampin (oral) and 15 mg/kg streptomycin ( intramuscular) for 8 weeks. This treatment protocol is effective for lesions measuring less than 10 cm in diameter and has an average cure rate of 50%.5 Unfortunately, streptomycin is associated with ototoxicity and nephrotoxicity.1,4 Clinicians should be aware that 1.9% to 26% of patients may have paradoxical worsening of BU early during antibiotic use due to increased host inflammatory response, but it subsides with continued treatment.1,4
Researchers in Australia have begun testing and using rifampin plus oral clarithromycin, ciprofloxacin, or moxifloxacin for 3 months. A common combination is oncedaily 10 mg/kg rifampicin and 400 mg/kg moxifloxacin.1 After multiple randomized controlled trials showed the efficacy of rifampicin in combination with clarithromycin, many physicians now recommend 10 mg/kg of rifampicin once daily and 7.5 mg/kg of clarithromycin twice daily.1,5 When BU is severe, intravenous amikacin and oral rifampin can be used for 4 to 8 weeks.5
Wound Management and Surgical Considerations—Since BU can cause extensive widespread ulceration, daily wound care is recommended. Clinicians should note that patients often experience pain during wound dressing, as gauze impairs dermal regeneration and adheres to wounds. A second-line treatment to combat patients’ intolerance to gauze placement—especially for large BU lesions causing mobility issues—includes surgical debridement with wide margins and grafting 4 weeks after antibiotic therapy. This surgical procedure also can treat the releasing contractures that BU is known to cause.1 Severe cases of BU also can be treated with physiotherapy to prevent further disability.5
If histologic analysis of the margins reveals the presence of acid-fast bacilli and granulomas, the probability of future recurrence is high. In those instances, antibiotic therapy is given for prevention. In Australia, the Consensus Council Conference has recommended the removal of not only necrotic tissue but also a small margin of normal tissue to prevent the spread leading to recurrence.1,5,8
Prevention—Multiple prevention techniques have been suggested to combat BU. Long sleeves and pants should be worn outdoors along with insect repellents in BU-endemic areas. Comprehensive—but perhaps impractical—prevention measures include avoidance of swimming and aquatic activities such as boating and fishing in BU-endemic areas. In the event of a skin abrasion, the wound should be cleaned and covered promptly.
There is no vaccine currently available for BU. Bacillus Calmette—Guérin vaccination can provide minimal protection against disseminated BU but with a short-term response.5 Fortunately, M ulcerans–specific vaccines are being developed. Currently, tested vaccines target an enzyme called mycolyl transferase, which is essential for the stability of the mycobacterial cell wall and could have powerful implications in preventing these ulcers. These mycolyl transferase–directed vaccines need to be further explored in the plight against BU.1,5,8
Final Thoughts
Buruli ulcer remains a considerable public health challenge in endemic regions, with substantial morbidity and potential long-term disability. Hence, continued research into its transmission mechanisms, treatment options, and preventive measures is crucial for reducing the impact of this disease on affected populations.
- Yotsu RR, Suzuki K, Simmonds RE, et al. Buruli ulcer: a review of the current knowledge. Curr Trop Med Rep. 2018;5:247-256. doi:10.1007 /s40475-018-0166-2
- Muleta AJ, Lappan R, Stinear TP, et al. Understanding the transmission of Mycobacterium ulcerans: a step towards controlling Buruli ulcer. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021;15:E0009678. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0009678
- MacCallum P, Tolhurst JC. A new mycobacterial infection in man. J Pathol Bacteriol. 1948;60:93-122.
- Van der Werf TS, Stienstra Y, Johnson RC, et al. Mycobacterium ulcerans disease. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83:785-791.
- World Health Organization. Buruli ulcer (Mycobacterium ulcerans infection). January 12, 2023. Accessed November 7, 2024. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/buruli-ulcer-(mycobacterium-ulcerans-infection)
- Hall BS, Hill K, McKenna M, et al. The pathogenic mechanism of the Mycobacterium ulcerans virulence factor, mycolactone, depends on blockade of protein translocation into the ER. PLoS Pathog. 2014;10:E1004061. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1004061
- Sarfo FS, Phillips R, Wansbrough-Jones M, et al. Recent advances: role of mycolactone in the pathogenesis and monitoring of Mycobacterium ulcerans infection/Buruli ulcer disease. Cell Microbiol. 2016;18:17-29. doi:10.1111/cmi.12547
- Guarner J. Buruli ulcer: review of a neglected skin mycobacterial disease. J Clin Microbiol. 2018;56:E01507- E01517. doi:10.1128 /JCM.01507-17
- Adusumilli S, Mve-Obiang A, Sparer T, et al. Mycobacterium ulcerans toxic macrolide, mycolactone modulates the host immune response and cellular location of M ulcerans in vitro and in vivo. Cell Microbiol. 2005;7:1295-1304. doi:10.1111/j.1462-5822.2005.00557
- Wallace JR, Mangas KM, Porter JL, et al. Mycobacterium ulcerans low infectious dose and mechanical transmission support insect bites and puncturing injuries in the spread of Buruli ulcer. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11:E0005553. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0005553
- Ezzedine K, Pistone T, Cottin J, et al. Buruli ulcer in long-term traveler to Senegal. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15:118-119. doi:10.3201 /eid1501.080123
- Eddyani M, Sopoh GE, Ayelo G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical and microbiological signs in patients with skin lesions resembling Buruli ulcer in an endemic region. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;67:827-834. doi:10.1093/cid/ciy197
Buruli ulcer (BU) is a potentially disabling necrotizing skin and soft tissue disease caused by Mycobacterium ulcerans infection.1,2 Buruli ulcer is most common in hot and humid climates and has caused considerable morbidity in Western African countries (Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, and Benin account for 73% of annual cases) and the temperate areas of Australia (283 reported cases in 2017).1-4 In fact, the first recognizable cases of BU were described in 6 Australian individuals living in a riverine area in 1948, although the term Buruli ulcer is derived from the increased number of cases reported from Buruli county in Uganda near the Nile River.1,3,4
From 2002 to 2017, 66,000 cases of BU were reported in 33 countries.1 While the focal distribution has been demonstrated in the tropical areas of Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Peru, and Mexico,4 nontropical nations such as Japan also are affected. Since 1981, 66 cases have been reported in Japan with M ulcerans subspecies—primarily Shinshuense, which has adapted to higher latitudes.1 Herein, we provide an overview of the pathogenesis, clinical presentation, and treatment of BU and highlight aquatic insects and mosquitoes as possible vectors of transmission.
Pathogenesis
Mycobacterium ulcerans is a nontuberculous mycobacterium and ubiquitous acid-fast gram-positive bacillus that can be cultured using a Lowenstein-Jensen agar and has a doubling rate of 48 hours.1,5 It produces the small 174-kb plasmid pMUM001-encoded compound mycolactone, a pathogenic toxin that causes immunosuppression, analgesia, and cytotoxic-associated tissue necrosis.1,5-9
Mycolactone is a polyketide macrolide with a 12-membrane lactone with 2 attached acyl side chains.1,7 Mycolactone is synthesized by the giant polyketide synthetases of M ulcerans. Mycolactone post-transcriptionally inhibits the development of lipopolysaccharide-dependent proinflammatory mediators—specifically by blocking protein translocation from the cytosol into the endoplasmic reticulum by targeting the SEC61 translocon.1,6 The lack of translocation of 30% to 50% of proteins leads to cellular stress and apoptosis mediated by Bim/Bcl2. A single point mutation in the SEC61 translocon subunit alpha 1 gene (SEC61A1) is associated with resistance to the cytotoxic effects of mycolactone.1
There are divergent hypotheses regarding the relationship of mycolactone to the Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein, with some researchers suggesting that mycolactone can attach to this protein, leading to cell detachment and death.7 However, others have proposed that mycolactone inhibits mTOR, activating the Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein and leading to subsequent extensive cytoskeleton remodeling.1 Mycolactone also can cause hypoesthesia, either by activating type 2 angiotensin II receptors and creating downstream neuron hyperpolarization or by killing Schwann cells.1
Transmission
Buruli ulcer caused by M ulcerans has a poorly understood transmission mechanism, and further studies are required to understand the underlying pathophysiology to decrease transmission rates and associated morbidity. Buruli ulcer is widely accepted to be transmitted to humans via predominantly water-rich environments; most cases occur around slow-moving and still bodies of water such as swamps, ponds, and marshes.1 Mycobacterium ulcerans DNA has been found in fish, water insects, and snails.1,4 It also has been present in samples from aquatic insects such as Hemiptera (water strider), Naucoridae (creeping water bugs and saucer bugs), and Belostomatidae (giant water bugs) in West Africa and also from Aulacodes feces and moss.1
Variations in geographic climate may lead to different modes of transmission of BU. For example, mosquitoes have been studied as a potential vector for BU in the temperate climate of Australia.2 However, more data are needed from other countries to support mosquitoes as possible vectors. Wallace et al10 performed a study that showed skin puncture from insect bites or other injuries increases the chance of transmitting M ulcerans in the environment to the skin.
Clinical Presentation
Buruli ulcer most often manifests in healthy children younger than 15 years.1,8 Potential risk factors include residing near a contaminated water source, swimming in a river, and being bitten by an insect in a river during the rainy season. Lack of protective clothing and mosquito nets also have been proposed as considerable risk factors for BU.2 Genetic polymorphism in the solute carrier family 11 member 1 gene (SLC11A1) may increase the risk for BU with M ulcerans transmission. It is essential to understand that infection with M ulcerans does not always lead to the development of BU.1
Buruli ulcer often begins as a painless nodule or papule that patients may confuse with an insect bite. Within a couple of weeks, the induration will grow into ill-defined edematous plaques that gradually turn into necrotic skin, which will eventually slough off to create painless to mildly painful irregular skin ulceration (Figure).11 The surrounding uninvolved skin often is edematous and pigmented. Unfortunately, deep ulcerations can lead to osteomyelitis with exposure of the underlying bone. A secondary bacterial infection may be involved if a foul smell accompanies the ulcer. The vast extension of the ulcer has been known to lead to amputations, contractures, or deformities.1-5 The nodule progression to ulceration varies and can occur within 3 weeks to 1 year of the initial exposure.1,8
skin, which will eventually slough off to create painless to mildly painful
irregular skin ulceration. The image is in the public domain. Ezzedine K,
Pistone T, Cottin J, et al. Buruli ulcer in long-term traveler to Senegal.
Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15:118-119. doi:10.3201/eid1501.080123
The World Health Organization (WHO) classifies BU into 3 categories: category 1 includes ulcers less than 5 cm in diameter; category 2 involves ulcers that are 5 to 15 cm in diameter; and category 3 involves ulcers that are larger than 15 cm in diameter as well as those involving the breasts, genitals, eyes, bones, or joints.4,8
Diagnosis
Cultures and microscopic examination of M ulcerans acid-fast bacilli can be used to confirm the diagnosis of BU. However, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the best confirmatory test, as the WHO reports that 70% of reported cases of BU are confirmed by PCR detection of DNA.1,4 Unfortunately, many BU-endemic areas lack feasible access to perform confirmatory tests such as PCR. Antigen detection assays, loop-mediated isothermal amplification tests, and detection of mycolactone by thinlayer chromatography are being developed to create more rapid and sensitive testing for BU.12
The lack of diagnostic testing for BU means physicians must rely on clinical diagnosis.1 However, the differential diagnosis is extensive and includes ulcers due to diabetes and arterial and venous insufficiency, cutaneous leishmaniasis, and Haemophilus ducreyi ulcers.5 Despite the broad differential, Eddyani et al12 found that BU diagnosed clinically by physicians had a sensitivity of 92%.
Treatment
Surgery was the first-line treatment for BU before the introduction of antibiotics for this condition. Antibiotics have created better outcomes with increased cure rates and decreased amputation.4
Pharmacotherapy—In the early 2000s, the WHO recommended a treatment regimen of once-daily 10 mg/kg rifampin (oral) and 15 mg/kg streptomycin ( intramuscular) for 8 weeks. This treatment protocol is effective for lesions measuring less than 10 cm in diameter and has an average cure rate of 50%.5 Unfortunately, streptomycin is associated with ototoxicity and nephrotoxicity.1,4 Clinicians should be aware that 1.9% to 26% of patients may have paradoxical worsening of BU early during antibiotic use due to increased host inflammatory response, but it subsides with continued treatment.1,4
Researchers in Australia have begun testing and using rifampin plus oral clarithromycin, ciprofloxacin, or moxifloxacin for 3 months. A common combination is oncedaily 10 mg/kg rifampicin and 400 mg/kg moxifloxacin.1 After multiple randomized controlled trials showed the efficacy of rifampicin in combination with clarithromycin, many physicians now recommend 10 mg/kg of rifampicin once daily and 7.5 mg/kg of clarithromycin twice daily.1,5 When BU is severe, intravenous amikacin and oral rifampin can be used for 4 to 8 weeks.5
Wound Management and Surgical Considerations—Since BU can cause extensive widespread ulceration, daily wound care is recommended. Clinicians should note that patients often experience pain during wound dressing, as gauze impairs dermal regeneration and adheres to wounds. A second-line treatment to combat patients’ intolerance to gauze placement—especially for large BU lesions causing mobility issues—includes surgical debridement with wide margins and grafting 4 weeks after antibiotic therapy. This surgical procedure also can treat the releasing contractures that BU is known to cause.1 Severe cases of BU also can be treated with physiotherapy to prevent further disability.5
If histologic analysis of the margins reveals the presence of acid-fast bacilli and granulomas, the probability of future recurrence is high. In those instances, antibiotic therapy is given for prevention. In Australia, the Consensus Council Conference has recommended the removal of not only necrotic tissue but also a small margin of normal tissue to prevent the spread leading to recurrence.1,5,8
Prevention—Multiple prevention techniques have been suggested to combat BU. Long sleeves and pants should be worn outdoors along with insect repellents in BU-endemic areas. Comprehensive—but perhaps impractical—prevention measures include avoidance of swimming and aquatic activities such as boating and fishing in BU-endemic areas. In the event of a skin abrasion, the wound should be cleaned and covered promptly.
There is no vaccine currently available for BU. Bacillus Calmette—Guérin vaccination can provide minimal protection against disseminated BU but with a short-term response.5 Fortunately, M ulcerans–specific vaccines are being developed. Currently, tested vaccines target an enzyme called mycolyl transferase, which is essential for the stability of the mycobacterial cell wall and could have powerful implications in preventing these ulcers. These mycolyl transferase–directed vaccines need to be further explored in the plight against BU.1,5,8
Final Thoughts
Buruli ulcer remains a considerable public health challenge in endemic regions, with substantial morbidity and potential long-term disability. Hence, continued research into its transmission mechanisms, treatment options, and preventive measures is crucial for reducing the impact of this disease on affected populations.
Buruli ulcer (BU) is a potentially disabling necrotizing skin and soft tissue disease caused by Mycobacterium ulcerans infection.1,2 Buruli ulcer is most common in hot and humid climates and has caused considerable morbidity in Western African countries (Côte d’Ivoire, Ghana, and Benin account for 73% of annual cases) and the temperate areas of Australia (283 reported cases in 2017).1-4 In fact, the first recognizable cases of BU were described in 6 Australian individuals living in a riverine area in 1948, although the term Buruli ulcer is derived from the increased number of cases reported from Buruli county in Uganda near the Nile River.1,3,4
From 2002 to 2017, 66,000 cases of BU were reported in 33 countries.1 While the focal distribution has been demonstrated in the tropical areas of Sri Lanka, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea, Peru, and Mexico,4 nontropical nations such as Japan also are affected. Since 1981, 66 cases have been reported in Japan with M ulcerans subspecies—primarily Shinshuense, which has adapted to higher latitudes.1 Herein, we provide an overview of the pathogenesis, clinical presentation, and treatment of BU and highlight aquatic insects and mosquitoes as possible vectors of transmission.
Pathogenesis
Mycobacterium ulcerans is a nontuberculous mycobacterium and ubiquitous acid-fast gram-positive bacillus that can be cultured using a Lowenstein-Jensen agar and has a doubling rate of 48 hours.1,5 It produces the small 174-kb plasmid pMUM001-encoded compound mycolactone, a pathogenic toxin that causes immunosuppression, analgesia, and cytotoxic-associated tissue necrosis.1,5-9
Mycolactone is a polyketide macrolide with a 12-membrane lactone with 2 attached acyl side chains.1,7 Mycolactone is synthesized by the giant polyketide synthetases of M ulcerans. Mycolactone post-transcriptionally inhibits the development of lipopolysaccharide-dependent proinflammatory mediators—specifically by blocking protein translocation from the cytosol into the endoplasmic reticulum by targeting the SEC61 translocon.1,6 The lack of translocation of 30% to 50% of proteins leads to cellular stress and apoptosis mediated by Bim/Bcl2. A single point mutation in the SEC61 translocon subunit alpha 1 gene (SEC61A1) is associated with resistance to the cytotoxic effects of mycolactone.1
There are divergent hypotheses regarding the relationship of mycolactone to the Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein, with some researchers suggesting that mycolactone can attach to this protein, leading to cell detachment and death.7 However, others have proposed that mycolactone inhibits mTOR, activating the Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome protein and leading to subsequent extensive cytoskeleton remodeling.1 Mycolactone also can cause hypoesthesia, either by activating type 2 angiotensin II receptors and creating downstream neuron hyperpolarization or by killing Schwann cells.1
Transmission
Buruli ulcer caused by M ulcerans has a poorly understood transmission mechanism, and further studies are required to understand the underlying pathophysiology to decrease transmission rates and associated morbidity. Buruli ulcer is widely accepted to be transmitted to humans via predominantly water-rich environments; most cases occur around slow-moving and still bodies of water such as swamps, ponds, and marshes.1 Mycobacterium ulcerans DNA has been found in fish, water insects, and snails.1,4 It also has been present in samples from aquatic insects such as Hemiptera (water strider), Naucoridae (creeping water bugs and saucer bugs), and Belostomatidae (giant water bugs) in West Africa and also from Aulacodes feces and moss.1
Variations in geographic climate may lead to different modes of transmission of BU. For example, mosquitoes have been studied as a potential vector for BU in the temperate climate of Australia.2 However, more data are needed from other countries to support mosquitoes as possible vectors. Wallace et al10 performed a study that showed skin puncture from insect bites or other injuries increases the chance of transmitting M ulcerans in the environment to the skin.
Clinical Presentation
Buruli ulcer most often manifests in healthy children younger than 15 years.1,8 Potential risk factors include residing near a contaminated water source, swimming in a river, and being bitten by an insect in a river during the rainy season. Lack of protective clothing and mosquito nets also have been proposed as considerable risk factors for BU.2 Genetic polymorphism in the solute carrier family 11 member 1 gene (SLC11A1) may increase the risk for BU with M ulcerans transmission. It is essential to understand that infection with M ulcerans does not always lead to the development of BU.1
Buruli ulcer often begins as a painless nodule or papule that patients may confuse with an insect bite. Within a couple of weeks, the induration will grow into ill-defined edematous plaques that gradually turn into necrotic skin, which will eventually slough off to create painless to mildly painful irregular skin ulceration (Figure).11 The surrounding uninvolved skin often is edematous and pigmented. Unfortunately, deep ulcerations can lead to osteomyelitis with exposure of the underlying bone. A secondary bacterial infection may be involved if a foul smell accompanies the ulcer. The vast extension of the ulcer has been known to lead to amputations, contractures, or deformities.1-5 The nodule progression to ulceration varies and can occur within 3 weeks to 1 year of the initial exposure.1,8
skin, which will eventually slough off to create painless to mildly painful
irregular skin ulceration. The image is in the public domain. Ezzedine K,
Pistone T, Cottin J, et al. Buruli ulcer in long-term traveler to Senegal.
Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15:118-119. doi:10.3201/eid1501.080123
The World Health Organization (WHO) classifies BU into 3 categories: category 1 includes ulcers less than 5 cm in diameter; category 2 involves ulcers that are 5 to 15 cm in diameter; and category 3 involves ulcers that are larger than 15 cm in diameter as well as those involving the breasts, genitals, eyes, bones, or joints.4,8
Diagnosis
Cultures and microscopic examination of M ulcerans acid-fast bacilli can be used to confirm the diagnosis of BU. However, polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is the best confirmatory test, as the WHO reports that 70% of reported cases of BU are confirmed by PCR detection of DNA.1,4 Unfortunately, many BU-endemic areas lack feasible access to perform confirmatory tests such as PCR. Antigen detection assays, loop-mediated isothermal amplification tests, and detection of mycolactone by thinlayer chromatography are being developed to create more rapid and sensitive testing for BU.12
The lack of diagnostic testing for BU means physicians must rely on clinical diagnosis.1 However, the differential diagnosis is extensive and includes ulcers due to diabetes and arterial and venous insufficiency, cutaneous leishmaniasis, and Haemophilus ducreyi ulcers.5 Despite the broad differential, Eddyani et al12 found that BU diagnosed clinically by physicians had a sensitivity of 92%.
Treatment
Surgery was the first-line treatment for BU before the introduction of antibiotics for this condition. Antibiotics have created better outcomes with increased cure rates and decreased amputation.4
Pharmacotherapy—In the early 2000s, the WHO recommended a treatment regimen of once-daily 10 mg/kg rifampin (oral) and 15 mg/kg streptomycin ( intramuscular) for 8 weeks. This treatment protocol is effective for lesions measuring less than 10 cm in diameter and has an average cure rate of 50%.5 Unfortunately, streptomycin is associated with ototoxicity and nephrotoxicity.1,4 Clinicians should be aware that 1.9% to 26% of patients may have paradoxical worsening of BU early during antibiotic use due to increased host inflammatory response, but it subsides with continued treatment.1,4
Researchers in Australia have begun testing and using rifampin plus oral clarithromycin, ciprofloxacin, or moxifloxacin for 3 months. A common combination is oncedaily 10 mg/kg rifampicin and 400 mg/kg moxifloxacin.1 After multiple randomized controlled trials showed the efficacy of rifampicin in combination with clarithromycin, many physicians now recommend 10 mg/kg of rifampicin once daily and 7.5 mg/kg of clarithromycin twice daily.1,5 When BU is severe, intravenous amikacin and oral rifampin can be used for 4 to 8 weeks.5
Wound Management and Surgical Considerations—Since BU can cause extensive widespread ulceration, daily wound care is recommended. Clinicians should note that patients often experience pain during wound dressing, as gauze impairs dermal regeneration and adheres to wounds. A second-line treatment to combat patients’ intolerance to gauze placement—especially for large BU lesions causing mobility issues—includes surgical debridement with wide margins and grafting 4 weeks after antibiotic therapy. This surgical procedure also can treat the releasing contractures that BU is known to cause.1 Severe cases of BU also can be treated with physiotherapy to prevent further disability.5
If histologic analysis of the margins reveals the presence of acid-fast bacilli and granulomas, the probability of future recurrence is high. In those instances, antibiotic therapy is given for prevention. In Australia, the Consensus Council Conference has recommended the removal of not only necrotic tissue but also a small margin of normal tissue to prevent the spread leading to recurrence.1,5,8
Prevention—Multiple prevention techniques have been suggested to combat BU. Long sleeves and pants should be worn outdoors along with insect repellents in BU-endemic areas. Comprehensive—but perhaps impractical—prevention measures include avoidance of swimming and aquatic activities such as boating and fishing in BU-endemic areas. In the event of a skin abrasion, the wound should be cleaned and covered promptly.
There is no vaccine currently available for BU. Bacillus Calmette—Guérin vaccination can provide minimal protection against disseminated BU but with a short-term response.5 Fortunately, M ulcerans–specific vaccines are being developed. Currently, tested vaccines target an enzyme called mycolyl transferase, which is essential for the stability of the mycobacterial cell wall and could have powerful implications in preventing these ulcers. These mycolyl transferase–directed vaccines need to be further explored in the plight against BU.1,5,8
Final Thoughts
Buruli ulcer remains a considerable public health challenge in endemic regions, with substantial morbidity and potential long-term disability. Hence, continued research into its transmission mechanisms, treatment options, and preventive measures is crucial for reducing the impact of this disease on affected populations.
- Yotsu RR, Suzuki K, Simmonds RE, et al. Buruli ulcer: a review of the current knowledge. Curr Trop Med Rep. 2018;5:247-256. doi:10.1007 /s40475-018-0166-2
- Muleta AJ, Lappan R, Stinear TP, et al. Understanding the transmission of Mycobacterium ulcerans: a step towards controlling Buruli ulcer. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021;15:E0009678. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0009678
- MacCallum P, Tolhurst JC. A new mycobacterial infection in man. J Pathol Bacteriol. 1948;60:93-122.
- Van der Werf TS, Stienstra Y, Johnson RC, et al. Mycobacterium ulcerans disease. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83:785-791.
- World Health Organization. Buruli ulcer (Mycobacterium ulcerans infection). January 12, 2023. Accessed November 7, 2024. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/buruli-ulcer-(mycobacterium-ulcerans-infection)
- Hall BS, Hill K, McKenna M, et al. The pathogenic mechanism of the Mycobacterium ulcerans virulence factor, mycolactone, depends on blockade of protein translocation into the ER. PLoS Pathog. 2014;10:E1004061. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1004061
- Sarfo FS, Phillips R, Wansbrough-Jones M, et al. Recent advances: role of mycolactone in the pathogenesis and monitoring of Mycobacterium ulcerans infection/Buruli ulcer disease. Cell Microbiol. 2016;18:17-29. doi:10.1111/cmi.12547
- Guarner J. Buruli ulcer: review of a neglected skin mycobacterial disease. J Clin Microbiol. 2018;56:E01507- E01517. doi:10.1128 /JCM.01507-17
- Adusumilli S, Mve-Obiang A, Sparer T, et al. Mycobacterium ulcerans toxic macrolide, mycolactone modulates the host immune response and cellular location of M ulcerans in vitro and in vivo. Cell Microbiol. 2005;7:1295-1304. doi:10.1111/j.1462-5822.2005.00557
- Wallace JR, Mangas KM, Porter JL, et al. Mycobacterium ulcerans low infectious dose and mechanical transmission support insect bites and puncturing injuries in the spread of Buruli ulcer. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11:E0005553. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0005553
- Ezzedine K, Pistone T, Cottin J, et al. Buruli ulcer in long-term traveler to Senegal. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15:118-119. doi:10.3201 /eid1501.080123
- Eddyani M, Sopoh GE, Ayelo G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical and microbiological signs in patients with skin lesions resembling Buruli ulcer in an endemic region. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;67:827-834. doi:10.1093/cid/ciy197
- Yotsu RR, Suzuki K, Simmonds RE, et al. Buruli ulcer: a review of the current knowledge. Curr Trop Med Rep. 2018;5:247-256. doi:10.1007 /s40475-018-0166-2
- Muleta AJ, Lappan R, Stinear TP, et al. Understanding the transmission of Mycobacterium ulcerans: a step towards controlling Buruli ulcer. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2021;15:E0009678. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0009678
- MacCallum P, Tolhurst JC. A new mycobacterial infection in man. J Pathol Bacteriol. 1948;60:93-122.
- Van der Werf TS, Stienstra Y, Johnson RC, et al. Mycobacterium ulcerans disease. Bull World Health Organ. 2005;83:785-791.
- World Health Organization. Buruli ulcer (Mycobacterium ulcerans infection). January 12, 2023. Accessed November 7, 2024. https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/buruli-ulcer-(mycobacterium-ulcerans-infection)
- Hall BS, Hill K, McKenna M, et al. The pathogenic mechanism of the Mycobacterium ulcerans virulence factor, mycolactone, depends on blockade of protein translocation into the ER. PLoS Pathog. 2014;10:E1004061. doi:10.1371/journal.ppat.1004061
- Sarfo FS, Phillips R, Wansbrough-Jones M, et al. Recent advances: role of mycolactone in the pathogenesis and monitoring of Mycobacterium ulcerans infection/Buruli ulcer disease. Cell Microbiol. 2016;18:17-29. doi:10.1111/cmi.12547
- Guarner J. Buruli ulcer: review of a neglected skin mycobacterial disease. J Clin Microbiol. 2018;56:E01507- E01517. doi:10.1128 /JCM.01507-17
- Adusumilli S, Mve-Obiang A, Sparer T, et al. Mycobacterium ulcerans toxic macrolide, mycolactone modulates the host immune response and cellular location of M ulcerans in vitro and in vivo. Cell Microbiol. 2005;7:1295-1304. doi:10.1111/j.1462-5822.2005.00557
- Wallace JR, Mangas KM, Porter JL, et al. Mycobacterium ulcerans low infectious dose and mechanical transmission support insect bites and puncturing injuries in the spread of Buruli ulcer. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2017;11:E0005553. doi:10.1371/journal.pntd.0005553
- Ezzedine K, Pistone T, Cottin J, et al. Buruli ulcer in long-term traveler to Senegal. Emerg Infect Dis. 2009;15:118-119. doi:10.3201 /eid1501.080123
- Eddyani M, Sopoh GE, Ayelo G, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of clinical and microbiological signs in patients with skin lesions resembling Buruli ulcer in an endemic region. Clin Infect Dis. 2018;67:827-834. doi:10.1093/cid/ciy197
Buruli Ulcer Transmission: Environmental Pathways and Implications for Dermatologic Care
Buruli Ulcer Transmission: Environmental Pathways and Implications for Dermatologic Care
PRACTICE POINTS
- Buruli ulcer (BU) is a necrotizing cutaneous disease caused by Mycobacterium ulcerans with possible transmission from aquatic insects and mosquitoes.
- Buruli ulcer often manifests in children as painless induration that gradually progresses to painless or mildly painful irregular skin ulceration.
- Treatment options for BU include rifampin and streptomycin, but larger lesions may require surgical debridement.
- No vaccine currently exists for M ulcerans, but clinical trials targeting mycolyl transferase are underway.

What’s Eating You? Hookworm and Cutaneous Larva Migrans
What’s Eating You? Hookworm and
Cutaneous Larva Migrans
It is estimated that the prevalence of human hookworm infection is approximately 450 million individuals worldwide, representing a substantial global disease burden.1 The annual global public health burden ranges from approximately 2 million to 4 million disability-adjusted life-years and $10 billion to $140 billion in hookwormrelated costs.2 In this article, we discuss the lifecycle, transmission, and disease burden of cutaneous larva migrans (CLM) as well as prevention and treatment strategies.
Background
The Ancylostomatidae nematode family comprises at least 68 known species of hookworm that infect more than 110 different species of mammals.3 Many of these parasites are able to infect more than 1 primary host species, but from a disease perspective they can be classified as either anthropophilic, with humans as the intended host, or zoonotic, with humans as an incidental host. It is important to make this distinction because, though the lifecycles and biology of hookworm species generally are similar, the manifestations of incidental human infection from zoonotic hookworms are different from those of anthropophilic hookworms. Of the anthropophilic species, Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale predominate. In the instance of zoonotic hookworm, dog-infecting A caninum and cat- and doginfecting A braziliense and Uncinaria stenocephala are common causes of incidental human disease.3
The life cycle of Ancylostomatidae organisms is astounding. Through millions of years of co-evolution with mammals,4 these parasitic worms have developed perhaps one of the most circuitous paths to propagate themselves in the natural world. Hookworms start their arduous journey as eggs deposited in soil, sand, and ground vegetation from the feces of infected animals.5 Approximately 1 day after the eggs are deposited, they hatch and begin the larval stage, during which they become infective 1 to 5 weeks later. At this point, the larvae become sensitive to their environment, responding to rising temperatures, increasing carbon dioxide levels, and vibrations in the soil—all of which suggest the presence of a potential host and contribute to a concordant increase in undulatory movement of the larvae.5,6 Here, the most vulnerable tissues include the uncovered soles, palms, and buttocks of host mammals that come into contact with contaminated soil. In an undulating fashion and guided by temperature cues, the larvae locate the skin of the host and utilize a mixture of enzymes including hyaluronidases, metalloprotease, and other proteases to penetrate the epidermis.7 Anthropophilic hookworms such as N americanus and A duodenale will enter the circulatory system; from there, the hookworms migrate through the right-sided cardiopulmonary circuit and eventually ascend into the pulmonary vasculature.8 They then penetrate the lung capillary beds and parenchyma to reach the alveoli, ascend the respiratory tree, and, with the help of the mucociliary escalator, reach the esophagus, where they are swallowed by the host. In the gastrointestinal tract, adult hookworms consume host blood, mate, and lay eggs over a period of approximately 1 to 3 years if left untreated.9 Eggs are laid into the lower gastrointestinal tract, and the journey begins again in feces contacting ground or soil.
Geographic Distribution
Hookworms are found in almost all regions of the world, with species-specific distributions that highlight tropical and subtropical regions. Necator americanus and A duodenale are the most common hookworm species, with the former found predominantly in Southeast Asia and Latin America and the latter in Asia-Pacific regions.10 The highest prevalence of hookworms is in Southeast Asia followed by Sub-Saharan Africa, and the unique climate and soil composition of a region help determine the best environments for specific species of hookworm to thrive.11 In addition, socioeconomics and social determinants of health play a big role in the spread of hookworms, as hygiene practices (eg, wearing clean shoes and clothing, bathing), infrastructure (eg, clean water and streets), and anthelmintic campaigns help reduce transmission.12 Soil-transmitted helminths were once endemic to the southeastern United States, with some reports of approximately 40% of individuals infected in the south in the early 1900s.13 Anthelmintic campaigns such as water, sanitation, and hygiene programs as well as deworming of humans and livestock have proven effective in reducing the prevalence of helminth disease in industrialized nations.13,14 However, zoonotic infections remain a problem in these regions, and in some parts of the United States more than 40% of sampled cats and dogs harbored species such as A braziliense.15
Clinical Manifestation
Initial hookworm infection often goes unnoticed because symptoms can range in severity, but it is characterized by transient ground itch—a local pruritic, erythematous, and papular eruption that develops in response to epidermal penetration.16 Because the larvae must traverse the host from skin to target organs for reproduction over several weeks, iron-deficiency anemia will manifest much later than signs of the initial penetration. In the case of incidental infection from zoonotic Ancylostomatidae organisms, the misguided larvae result in CLM, an often intensely pruritic skin condition that will self-resolve in 2 to 8 weeks with eventual death of the larvae.5
Diagnosis and Pathology of Disease
Zoonotic Hookworm—The major presenting sign of zoonotic hookworm infection is CLM. The diagnosis of CLM usually is made clinically, as the larvae themselves are 0.5 mm thick to 10 mm long (Figure 1) and usually extend several centimeters beyond the dermal lesion, with dermoscopy having limited utility.17 Patients may begin to experience itching as little as 1 hour after hookworm penetration of the skin.18 Once in contact with the skin, the hookworms’ hyaluronidases and proteases are capable of breaking through the epidermis, but zoonotic hookworms typically are unable to penetrate the basal layer of the human epidermis and remain entombed between the stratum granulosum and stratum corneum. With the exception of rare cases of direct or indirect pulmonary involvement resulting in Löffler syndrome,19 the larvae will die within weeks to months, and symptoms will subsequently resolve.
Although the infection generally is self-limiting, the dermatologic manifestations of CLM can be severe and warrant intervention. The lesions start as small reddish papules at the site of penetration (Figure 2), then the hallmark elevated, migrating, serpiginous, urticarial rash develops (Figure 3). Cutaneous larva migrans generally manifests unilaterally and is both erythematous and intensely pruritic. As the larvae migrate, they leave behind 1- to 5-cm tunneled creeping eruptions in their wake. The lesions, which can manifest with pain or be painless, may develop eczematous, bullous, follicular, or impetiginized appearances.20 Atypical manifestations include folliculitis and urticarial plaques.17
cutaneous larval migrans on the palm.
Anthropophilic Hookworm—The lifecycles of N americanus and A duodenale are completed in human infection. Dermatologic manifestations are transient with the development of ground itch at the site of epidermal penetration. The hookworms employ collagenases that allow penetration of the basal layer of the skin, and eosinophilia develops as the parasites travel from the skin to the small intestine. Once attached to the gastrointestinal lumen, blood meals and proteolytic enzymes result in iron-deficiency anemia in the host and may lead to weakness, fatigue, and low birth weights in pregnant patients. With prolonged infection or heavy parasitic burden, patients can develop hypoproteinemia, anasarca, and yellowing of the skin known as chlorosis.11 A clinical diagnosis can be made by examining patient stool samples for eggs, and definitive characterization can be made using molecular tools such as polymerase chain reaction.21,22
Common to hookworm infections is the immune reaction, which promotes inflammation with localized eosinophilia and mastocytosis.11 In a clinical biopsy specimen of gut—usually obtained through esophagogastroduodenoscopy— T-helper (Th) 2–type immune (IL-4, IL-5, IL-9 and IL-13), regulatory Th10 (IL-10 and transcription growth factor β), and some evidence of Th1 (interferon gamma and IL-2) cytokines are present, but little evidence of Th17-type immune response was found.23 It is believed that in zoonotic infections, antiparasitic IgE from basophils are somewhat successful at trapping the helminths in the epidermis, but in the anthropophilic species, IgE and Th2 responses are ineffective at clearing the parasite from the gut, and the defeated immune system transitions to a host-tolerance approach of limiting infection.11 It is now believed that this natural armistice can be manipulated into a potential therapy against autoimmune and inflammatory conditions. Intentional infection with zoonotic whipworm or hookworm has been proposed as a mechanism of switching Th1 and Th2 responses to host-tolerant mechanisms in conditions such as Crohn disease and celiac disease,24 and it has even been hypothesized that prior hookworm infection may reduce the chance of developing allergic conditions such as eczema.25
Treatment and Prevention
The World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend a single oral dose of 400 mg albendazole for adults or 10 to 15 mg/kg in children for CLM. A single dose of ivermectin at 12 mg in adults or 150 μg/kg in children can be used as an alternative where albendazole is not available.11 Topical applications of thiabendazole 10% to 15% under occlusion or 3 times daily for 15 days without occlusion also can manage CLM, and pruritus can be treated with topical corticosteroids for symptomatic relief. Oral albendazole 400 mg twice daily or mebendazole 100 mg twice daily for 3 days or a single 500-mg dose, as well as 11 mg/kg (up to a maximum of 1 g) oral pyrantel pamoate once daily for 3 days can be used to treat intestinal hookworm infection, though it should be avoided in pregnancy. Iron deficiency should be managed with supplementation.11
Prevention of hookworm infection is focused around 2 broad public health efforts: mass drug administration programs and the water, sanitation, and hygiene program. In mass drug administration, treatments such as benzimidazoles are given in mass to communities affected by endemic hookworm as a single dose to reduce the burden of disease. Together, these strategies effectively eliminated hookworms in many developed nations, but areas of resurgence are beginning to surface worldwide. With changes in climate, emerging drug resistance, and socioeconomic disparities, particularly affecting the southeast, a resurgence of hookworm has occurred in the United States.26 One recent study demonstrated that almost one-third (19/55) of children sampled in an impoverished area of rural Alabama had hookworm eggs in their stool.27 Furthermore, pets serve not only as zoonotic reservoirs for CLM recurrence but also as vehicles for the evolution of drug-resistant strains, leading some to call for a ban of animals from beaches and playgrounds as well as tightly controlled veterinary programs.5,28 Ubiquitous benzimidazole use in livestock has led to bendazole-resistant strains, and it is likely that with continued and poorly adherent drug use, more zoonotic and anthropophilic drug-resistant strains of hookworm will emerge.29,30
Conclusion
The burden of hookworm infection and CLM is substantial in parts of the United States. Dermatologists play a critical role in the recognition and management of hookworm infection for both treatment of affected patients and the subsequent prevention of its spread. As drug-resistant strains evolve, clinicians, public health officials, and scientists need to continue to work together to prevent and treat hookworm infection.
- Vos T, Abajobir AA, Abate KH, et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 328 diseases and injuries for 195 countries, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet. 2017;390:1211-1259.
- Bartsch SM, Hotez PJ, Asti L, et al. The global economic and health burden of human hookworm infection. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10:E0004922.
- Seguel M, Gottdenker N. The diversity and impact of hookworm infections in wildlife. Int J Parasitol Parasites Wildl. 2017;6:177-194.
- Adams BJ, Peat SM, Dillman AR. Phylogeny and evolution. In: Entomopathogenic Nematodes: Systematics, Phylogeny and Bacterial Symbionts. Brill; 2010:693-733.
- Heukelbach J, Feldmeier H. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of hookworm-related cutaneous larva migrans. Lancet Infect Dis. 2008;8:302-309.
- Haas W, Haberl B, Idris I, et al. Infective larvae of the human hookworms Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale differ in their orientation behaviour when crawling on surfaces. Parasitol Res. 2005;95:25-29.
- Hotez P, Narasimhan S, Haggerty J, et al. Hyaluronidase from infective Ancylostoma hookworm larvae and its possible function as a virulence factor in tissue invasion and in cutaneous larva migrans. Infect Immun. 1992;60:1018-1023.
- Brooker S, Bethony J, Hotez PJ. Human hookworm infection in the 21st century. Adv Parasitol. 2004;58:197-288.
- Hoagland K, Schad G. Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale: life history parameters and epidemiological implications of two sympatric hookworms of humans. Exp Parasitol. 1978;44:36-49.
- Clements ACA, Alene KA. Global distribution of human hookworm species and differences in their morbidity effects: a systematic review. Lancet Microbe. 2022;3:E72-E79.
- Loukas A, Hotez PJ, Diemert D, et al. Hookworm infection. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2:1-18.
- Gazzinelli A, Correa-Oliveira R, Yang GJ, et al. A research agenda for helminth diseases of humans: social ecology, environmental determinants, and health systems. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6:E1603.
- Starr MC, Montgomery SP. Soil-transmitted helminthiasis in the United States: a systematic review—1940-2010. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2011;85:680-684.
- Strunz EC, Addiss DG, Stocks ME, et al. Water, sanitation, hygiene, and soil-transmitted helminth infection: a systematic review and metaanalysis. PLoS Med. 2014;11:E1001620.
- Liotta JL, Youn H, Aksel S, et al. Prevalence of Ancylostoma braziliense in dogs from Alachua and Marion Counties, Florida, United States. J Parasitol. 2012;98:1039-1040.
- Hotez PJ, Brooker S, Bethony JM, et al. Hookworm infection. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:799-807.
- Prickett KA, Ferringer TC. What’s eating you? cutaneous larva migrans. Cutis. 2015;95:126-128.
- Feldmeier H, Schuster A. Mini review: hookworm-related cutaneous larva migrans. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2012;31:915-918.
- Tan SK, Liu TT. Cutaneous larva migrans complicated by Löffler syndrome. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:210-212.
- Eksomtramage T, Aiempanakit K. Bullous and pustular cutaneous larva migrans: two case reports and a literature review. IDCases. 2018;12:130-132.
- Utzinger J, Rinaldi L, Lohourignon LK, et al. FLOTAC: a new sensitive technique for the diagnosis of hookworm infections in humans. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2008;102:84-90.
- Chidambaram M, Parija SC, Toi PC, et al. Evaluation of the utility of conventional polymerase chain reaction for detection and species differentiation in human hookworm infections. Trop Parasitol. 2017;7:111-116.
- Gaze S, McSorley HJ, Daveson J, et al. Characterising the mucosal and systemic immune responses to experimental human hookworm infection. PLoS Pathog. 2012;8:E1002520.
- Croese J, O’Neil J, Masson J, et al. A proof of concept study establishing Necator americanus in Crohn’s patients and reservoir donors. Gut. 2006;55:136-137.
- Mpairwe H, Amoah AS. Parasites and allergy: observations from Africa. Parasite Immunol. 2019;41:E12589.
- Albonico M, Savioli L. Hookworm: a neglected resurgent infection. Editorial. BMJ. 2017;359:j4813.
- McKenna ML, McAtee S, Bryan PE, et al. Human intestinal parasite burden and poor sanitation in rural Alabama. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2017;97:1623-1628.
- Traversa D. Pet roundworms and hookworms: a continuing need for global worming. Parasit Vectors. 2012;5:1-19.
- Geerts S, Gryseels B. Drug resistance in human helminths: current situation and lessons from livestock. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2000;13:207-222.
- Jimenez Castro PD, Howell SB, Schaefer JJ, et al. Multiple drug resistance in the canine hookworm Ancylostoma caninum: an emerging threat? Parasit Vectors. 2019;12:1-15.
It is estimated that the prevalence of human hookworm infection is approximately 450 million individuals worldwide, representing a substantial global disease burden.1 The annual global public health burden ranges from approximately 2 million to 4 million disability-adjusted life-years and $10 billion to $140 billion in hookwormrelated costs.2 In this article, we discuss the lifecycle, transmission, and disease burden of cutaneous larva migrans (CLM) as well as prevention and treatment strategies.
Background
The Ancylostomatidae nematode family comprises at least 68 known species of hookworm that infect more than 110 different species of mammals.3 Many of these parasites are able to infect more than 1 primary host species, but from a disease perspective they can be classified as either anthropophilic, with humans as the intended host, or zoonotic, with humans as an incidental host. It is important to make this distinction because, though the lifecycles and biology of hookworm species generally are similar, the manifestations of incidental human infection from zoonotic hookworms are different from those of anthropophilic hookworms. Of the anthropophilic species, Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale predominate. In the instance of zoonotic hookworm, dog-infecting A caninum and cat- and doginfecting A braziliense and Uncinaria stenocephala are common causes of incidental human disease.3
The life cycle of Ancylostomatidae organisms is astounding. Through millions of years of co-evolution with mammals,4 these parasitic worms have developed perhaps one of the most circuitous paths to propagate themselves in the natural world. Hookworms start their arduous journey as eggs deposited in soil, sand, and ground vegetation from the feces of infected animals.5 Approximately 1 day after the eggs are deposited, they hatch and begin the larval stage, during which they become infective 1 to 5 weeks later. At this point, the larvae become sensitive to their environment, responding to rising temperatures, increasing carbon dioxide levels, and vibrations in the soil—all of which suggest the presence of a potential host and contribute to a concordant increase in undulatory movement of the larvae.5,6 Here, the most vulnerable tissues include the uncovered soles, palms, and buttocks of host mammals that come into contact with contaminated soil. In an undulating fashion and guided by temperature cues, the larvae locate the skin of the host and utilize a mixture of enzymes including hyaluronidases, metalloprotease, and other proteases to penetrate the epidermis.7 Anthropophilic hookworms such as N americanus and A duodenale will enter the circulatory system; from there, the hookworms migrate through the right-sided cardiopulmonary circuit and eventually ascend into the pulmonary vasculature.8 They then penetrate the lung capillary beds and parenchyma to reach the alveoli, ascend the respiratory tree, and, with the help of the mucociliary escalator, reach the esophagus, where they are swallowed by the host. In the gastrointestinal tract, adult hookworms consume host blood, mate, and lay eggs over a period of approximately 1 to 3 years if left untreated.9 Eggs are laid into the lower gastrointestinal tract, and the journey begins again in feces contacting ground or soil.
Geographic Distribution
Hookworms are found in almost all regions of the world, with species-specific distributions that highlight tropical and subtropical regions. Necator americanus and A duodenale are the most common hookworm species, with the former found predominantly in Southeast Asia and Latin America and the latter in Asia-Pacific regions.10 The highest prevalence of hookworms is in Southeast Asia followed by Sub-Saharan Africa, and the unique climate and soil composition of a region help determine the best environments for specific species of hookworm to thrive.11 In addition, socioeconomics and social determinants of health play a big role in the spread of hookworms, as hygiene practices (eg, wearing clean shoes and clothing, bathing), infrastructure (eg, clean water and streets), and anthelmintic campaigns help reduce transmission.12 Soil-transmitted helminths were once endemic to the southeastern United States, with some reports of approximately 40% of individuals infected in the south in the early 1900s.13 Anthelmintic campaigns such as water, sanitation, and hygiene programs as well as deworming of humans and livestock have proven effective in reducing the prevalence of helminth disease in industrialized nations.13,14 However, zoonotic infections remain a problem in these regions, and in some parts of the United States more than 40% of sampled cats and dogs harbored species such as A braziliense.15
Clinical Manifestation
Initial hookworm infection often goes unnoticed because symptoms can range in severity, but it is characterized by transient ground itch—a local pruritic, erythematous, and papular eruption that develops in response to epidermal penetration.16 Because the larvae must traverse the host from skin to target organs for reproduction over several weeks, iron-deficiency anemia will manifest much later than signs of the initial penetration. In the case of incidental infection from zoonotic Ancylostomatidae organisms, the misguided larvae result in CLM, an often intensely pruritic skin condition that will self-resolve in 2 to 8 weeks with eventual death of the larvae.5
Diagnosis and Pathology of Disease
Zoonotic Hookworm—The major presenting sign of zoonotic hookworm infection is CLM. The diagnosis of CLM usually is made clinically, as the larvae themselves are 0.5 mm thick to 10 mm long (Figure 1) and usually extend several centimeters beyond the dermal lesion, with dermoscopy having limited utility.17 Patients may begin to experience itching as little as 1 hour after hookworm penetration of the skin.18 Once in contact with the skin, the hookworms’ hyaluronidases and proteases are capable of breaking through the epidermis, but zoonotic hookworms typically are unable to penetrate the basal layer of the human epidermis and remain entombed between the stratum granulosum and stratum corneum. With the exception of rare cases of direct or indirect pulmonary involvement resulting in Löffler syndrome,19 the larvae will die within weeks to months, and symptoms will subsequently resolve.
Although the infection generally is self-limiting, the dermatologic manifestations of CLM can be severe and warrant intervention. The lesions start as small reddish papules at the site of penetration (Figure 2), then the hallmark elevated, migrating, serpiginous, urticarial rash develops (Figure 3). Cutaneous larva migrans generally manifests unilaterally and is both erythematous and intensely pruritic. As the larvae migrate, they leave behind 1- to 5-cm tunneled creeping eruptions in their wake. The lesions, which can manifest with pain or be painless, may develop eczematous, bullous, follicular, or impetiginized appearances.20 Atypical manifestations include folliculitis and urticarial plaques.17
cutaneous larval migrans on the palm.
Anthropophilic Hookworm—The lifecycles of N americanus and A duodenale are completed in human infection. Dermatologic manifestations are transient with the development of ground itch at the site of epidermal penetration. The hookworms employ collagenases that allow penetration of the basal layer of the skin, and eosinophilia develops as the parasites travel from the skin to the small intestine. Once attached to the gastrointestinal lumen, blood meals and proteolytic enzymes result in iron-deficiency anemia in the host and may lead to weakness, fatigue, and low birth weights in pregnant patients. With prolonged infection or heavy parasitic burden, patients can develop hypoproteinemia, anasarca, and yellowing of the skin known as chlorosis.11 A clinical diagnosis can be made by examining patient stool samples for eggs, and definitive characterization can be made using molecular tools such as polymerase chain reaction.21,22
Common to hookworm infections is the immune reaction, which promotes inflammation with localized eosinophilia and mastocytosis.11 In a clinical biopsy specimen of gut—usually obtained through esophagogastroduodenoscopy— T-helper (Th) 2–type immune (IL-4, IL-5, IL-9 and IL-13), regulatory Th10 (IL-10 and transcription growth factor β), and some evidence of Th1 (interferon gamma and IL-2) cytokines are present, but little evidence of Th17-type immune response was found.23 It is believed that in zoonotic infections, antiparasitic IgE from basophils are somewhat successful at trapping the helminths in the epidermis, but in the anthropophilic species, IgE and Th2 responses are ineffective at clearing the parasite from the gut, and the defeated immune system transitions to a host-tolerance approach of limiting infection.11 It is now believed that this natural armistice can be manipulated into a potential therapy against autoimmune and inflammatory conditions. Intentional infection with zoonotic whipworm or hookworm has been proposed as a mechanism of switching Th1 and Th2 responses to host-tolerant mechanisms in conditions such as Crohn disease and celiac disease,24 and it has even been hypothesized that prior hookworm infection may reduce the chance of developing allergic conditions such as eczema.25
Treatment and Prevention
The World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend a single oral dose of 400 mg albendazole for adults or 10 to 15 mg/kg in children for CLM. A single dose of ivermectin at 12 mg in adults or 150 μg/kg in children can be used as an alternative where albendazole is not available.11 Topical applications of thiabendazole 10% to 15% under occlusion or 3 times daily for 15 days without occlusion also can manage CLM, and pruritus can be treated with topical corticosteroids for symptomatic relief. Oral albendazole 400 mg twice daily or mebendazole 100 mg twice daily for 3 days or a single 500-mg dose, as well as 11 mg/kg (up to a maximum of 1 g) oral pyrantel pamoate once daily for 3 days can be used to treat intestinal hookworm infection, though it should be avoided in pregnancy. Iron deficiency should be managed with supplementation.11
Prevention of hookworm infection is focused around 2 broad public health efforts: mass drug administration programs and the water, sanitation, and hygiene program. In mass drug administration, treatments such as benzimidazoles are given in mass to communities affected by endemic hookworm as a single dose to reduce the burden of disease. Together, these strategies effectively eliminated hookworms in many developed nations, but areas of resurgence are beginning to surface worldwide. With changes in climate, emerging drug resistance, and socioeconomic disparities, particularly affecting the southeast, a resurgence of hookworm has occurred in the United States.26 One recent study demonstrated that almost one-third (19/55) of children sampled in an impoverished area of rural Alabama had hookworm eggs in their stool.27 Furthermore, pets serve not only as zoonotic reservoirs for CLM recurrence but also as vehicles for the evolution of drug-resistant strains, leading some to call for a ban of animals from beaches and playgrounds as well as tightly controlled veterinary programs.5,28 Ubiquitous benzimidazole use in livestock has led to bendazole-resistant strains, and it is likely that with continued and poorly adherent drug use, more zoonotic and anthropophilic drug-resistant strains of hookworm will emerge.29,30
Conclusion
The burden of hookworm infection and CLM is substantial in parts of the United States. Dermatologists play a critical role in the recognition and management of hookworm infection for both treatment of affected patients and the subsequent prevention of its spread. As drug-resistant strains evolve, clinicians, public health officials, and scientists need to continue to work together to prevent and treat hookworm infection.
It is estimated that the prevalence of human hookworm infection is approximately 450 million individuals worldwide, representing a substantial global disease burden.1 The annual global public health burden ranges from approximately 2 million to 4 million disability-adjusted life-years and $10 billion to $140 billion in hookwormrelated costs.2 In this article, we discuss the lifecycle, transmission, and disease burden of cutaneous larva migrans (CLM) as well as prevention and treatment strategies.
Background
The Ancylostomatidae nematode family comprises at least 68 known species of hookworm that infect more than 110 different species of mammals.3 Many of these parasites are able to infect more than 1 primary host species, but from a disease perspective they can be classified as either anthropophilic, with humans as the intended host, or zoonotic, with humans as an incidental host. It is important to make this distinction because, though the lifecycles and biology of hookworm species generally are similar, the manifestations of incidental human infection from zoonotic hookworms are different from those of anthropophilic hookworms. Of the anthropophilic species, Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale predominate. In the instance of zoonotic hookworm, dog-infecting A caninum and cat- and doginfecting A braziliense and Uncinaria stenocephala are common causes of incidental human disease.3
The life cycle of Ancylostomatidae organisms is astounding. Through millions of years of co-evolution with mammals,4 these parasitic worms have developed perhaps one of the most circuitous paths to propagate themselves in the natural world. Hookworms start their arduous journey as eggs deposited in soil, sand, and ground vegetation from the feces of infected animals.5 Approximately 1 day after the eggs are deposited, they hatch and begin the larval stage, during which they become infective 1 to 5 weeks later. At this point, the larvae become sensitive to their environment, responding to rising temperatures, increasing carbon dioxide levels, and vibrations in the soil—all of which suggest the presence of a potential host and contribute to a concordant increase in undulatory movement of the larvae.5,6 Here, the most vulnerable tissues include the uncovered soles, palms, and buttocks of host mammals that come into contact with contaminated soil. In an undulating fashion and guided by temperature cues, the larvae locate the skin of the host and utilize a mixture of enzymes including hyaluronidases, metalloprotease, and other proteases to penetrate the epidermis.7 Anthropophilic hookworms such as N americanus and A duodenale will enter the circulatory system; from there, the hookworms migrate through the right-sided cardiopulmonary circuit and eventually ascend into the pulmonary vasculature.8 They then penetrate the lung capillary beds and parenchyma to reach the alveoli, ascend the respiratory tree, and, with the help of the mucociliary escalator, reach the esophagus, where they are swallowed by the host. In the gastrointestinal tract, adult hookworms consume host blood, mate, and lay eggs over a period of approximately 1 to 3 years if left untreated.9 Eggs are laid into the lower gastrointestinal tract, and the journey begins again in feces contacting ground or soil.
Geographic Distribution
Hookworms are found in almost all regions of the world, with species-specific distributions that highlight tropical and subtropical regions. Necator americanus and A duodenale are the most common hookworm species, with the former found predominantly in Southeast Asia and Latin America and the latter in Asia-Pacific regions.10 The highest prevalence of hookworms is in Southeast Asia followed by Sub-Saharan Africa, and the unique climate and soil composition of a region help determine the best environments for specific species of hookworm to thrive.11 In addition, socioeconomics and social determinants of health play a big role in the spread of hookworms, as hygiene practices (eg, wearing clean shoes and clothing, bathing), infrastructure (eg, clean water and streets), and anthelmintic campaigns help reduce transmission.12 Soil-transmitted helminths were once endemic to the southeastern United States, with some reports of approximately 40% of individuals infected in the south in the early 1900s.13 Anthelmintic campaigns such as water, sanitation, and hygiene programs as well as deworming of humans and livestock have proven effective in reducing the prevalence of helminth disease in industrialized nations.13,14 However, zoonotic infections remain a problem in these regions, and in some parts of the United States more than 40% of sampled cats and dogs harbored species such as A braziliense.15
Clinical Manifestation
Initial hookworm infection often goes unnoticed because symptoms can range in severity, but it is characterized by transient ground itch—a local pruritic, erythematous, and papular eruption that develops in response to epidermal penetration.16 Because the larvae must traverse the host from skin to target organs for reproduction over several weeks, iron-deficiency anemia will manifest much later than signs of the initial penetration. In the case of incidental infection from zoonotic Ancylostomatidae organisms, the misguided larvae result in CLM, an often intensely pruritic skin condition that will self-resolve in 2 to 8 weeks with eventual death of the larvae.5
Diagnosis and Pathology of Disease
Zoonotic Hookworm—The major presenting sign of zoonotic hookworm infection is CLM. The diagnosis of CLM usually is made clinically, as the larvae themselves are 0.5 mm thick to 10 mm long (Figure 1) and usually extend several centimeters beyond the dermal lesion, with dermoscopy having limited utility.17 Patients may begin to experience itching as little as 1 hour after hookworm penetration of the skin.18 Once in contact with the skin, the hookworms’ hyaluronidases and proteases are capable of breaking through the epidermis, but zoonotic hookworms typically are unable to penetrate the basal layer of the human epidermis and remain entombed between the stratum granulosum and stratum corneum. With the exception of rare cases of direct or indirect pulmonary involvement resulting in Löffler syndrome,19 the larvae will die within weeks to months, and symptoms will subsequently resolve.
Although the infection generally is self-limiting, the dermatologic manifestations of CLM can be severe and warrant intervention. The lesions start as small reddish papules at the site of penetration (Figure 2), then the hallmark elevated, migrating, serpiginous, urticarial rash develops (Figure 3). Cutaneous larva migrans generally manifests unilaterally and is both erythematous and intensely pruritic. As the larvae migrate, they leave behind 1- to 5-cm tunneled creeping eruptions in their wake. The lesions, which can manifest with pain or be painless, may develop eczematous, bullous, follicular, or impetiginized appearances.20 Atypical manifestations include folliculitis and urticarial plaques.17
cutaneous larval migrans on the palm.
Anthropophilic Hookworm—The lifecycles of N americanus and A duodenale are completed in human infection. Dermatologic manifestations are transient with the development of ground itch at the site of epidermal penetration. The hookworms employ collagenases that allow penetration of the basal layer of the skin, and eosinophilia develops as the parasites travel from the skin to the small intestine. Once attached to the gastrointestinal lumen, blood meals and proteolytic enzymes result in iron-deficiency anemia in the host and may lead to weakness, fatigue, and low birth weights in pregnant patients. With prolonged infection or heavy parasitic burden, patients can develop hypoproteinemia, anasarca, and yellowing of the skin known as chlorosis.11 A clinical diagnosis can be made by examining patient stool samples for eggs, and definitive characterization can be made using molecular tools such as polymerase chain reaction.21,22
Common to hookworm infections is the immune reaction, which promotes inflammation with localized eosinophilia and mastocytosis.11 In a clinical biopsy specimen of gut—usually obtained through esophagogastroduodenoscopy— T-helper (Th) 2–type immune (IL-4, IL-5, IL-9 and IL-13), regulatory Th10 (IL-10 and transcription growth factor β), and some evidence of Th1 (interferon gamma and IL-2) cytokines are present, but little evidence of Th17-type immune response was found.23 It is believed that in zoonotic infections, antiparasitic IgE from basophils are somewhat successful at trapping the helminths in the epidermis, but in the anthropophilic species, IgE and Th2 responses are ineffective at clearing the parasite from the gut, and the defeated immune system transitions to a host-tolerance approach of limiting infection.11 It is now believed that this natural armistice can be manipulated into a potential therapy against autoimmune and inflammatory conditions. Intentional infection with zoonotic whipworm or hookworm has been proposed as a mechanism of switching Th1 and Th2 responses to host-tolerant mechanisms in conditions such as Crohn disease and celiac disease,24 and it has even been hypothesized that prior hookworm infection may reduce the chance of developing allergic conditions such as eczema.25
Treatment and Prevention
The World Health Organization and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommend a single oral dose of 400 mg albendazole for adults or 10 to 15 mg/kg in children for CLM. A single dose of ivermectin at 12 mg in adults or 150 μg/kg in children can be used as an alternative where albendazole is not available.11 Topical applications of thiabendazole 10% to 15% under occlusion or 3 times daily for 15 days without occlusion also can manage CLM, and pruritus can be treated with topical corticosteroids for symptomatic relief. Oral albendazole 400 mg twice daily or mebendazole 100 mg twice daily for 3 days or a single 500-mg dose, as well as 11 mg/kg (up to a maximum of 1 g) oral pyrantel pamoate once daily for 3 days can be used to treat intestinal hookworm infection, though it should be avoided in pregnancy. Iron deficiency should be managed with supplementation.11
Prevention of hookworm infection is focused around 2 broad public health efforts: mass drug administration programs and the water, sanitation, and hygiene program. In mass drug administration, treatments such as benzimidazoles are given in mass to communities affected by endemic hookworm as a single dose to reduce the burden of disease. Together, these strategies effectively eliminated hookworms in many developed nations, but areas of resurgence are beginning to surface worldwide. With changes in climate, emerging drug resistance, and socioeconomic disparities, particularly affecting the southeast, a resurgence of hookworm has occurred in the United States.26 One recent study demonstrated that almost one-third (19/55) of children sampled in an impoverished area of rural Alabama had hookworm eggs in their stool.27 Furthermore, pets serve not only as zoonotic reservoirs for CLM recurrence but also as vehicles for the evolution of drug-resistant strains, leading some to call for a ban of animals from beaches and playgrounds as well as tightly controlled veterinary programs.5,28 Ubiquitous benzimidazole use in livestock has led to bendazole-resistant strains, and it is likely that with continued and poorly adherent drug use, more zoonotic and anthropophilic drug-resistant strains of hookworm will emerge.29,30
Conclusion
The burden of hookworm infection and CLM is substantial in parts of the United States. Dermatologists play a critical role in the recognition and management of hookworm infection for both treatment of affected patients and the subsequent prevention of its spread. As drug-resistant strains evolve, clinicians, public health officials, and scientists need to continue to work together to prevent and treat hookworm infection.
- Vos T, Abajobir AA, Abate KH, et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 328 diseases and injuries for 195 countries, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet. 2017;390:1211-1259.
- Bartsch SM, Hotez PJ, Asti L, et al. The global economic and health burden of human hookworm infection. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10:E0004922.
- Seguel M, Gottdenker N. The diversity and impact of hookworm infections in wildlife. Int J Parasitol Parasites Wildl. 2017;6:177-194.
- Adams BJ, Peat SM, Dillman AR. Phylogeny and evolution. In: Entomopathogenic Nematodes: Systematics, Phylogeny and Bacterial Symbionts. Brill; 2010:693-733.
- Heukelbach J, Feldmeier H. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of hookworm-related cutaneous larva migrans. Lancet Infect Dis. 2008;8:302-309.
- Haas W, Haberl B, Idris I, et al. Infective larvae of the human hookworms Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale differ in their orientation behaviour when crawling on surfaces. Parasitol Res. 2005;95:25-29.
- Hotez P, Narasimhan S, Haggerty J, et al. Hyaluronidase from infective Ancylostoma hookworm larvae and its possible function as a virulence factor in tissue invasion and in cutaneous larva migrans. Infect Immun. 1992;60:1018-1023.
- Brooker S, Bethony J, Hotez PJ. Human hookworm infection in the 21st century. Adv Parasitol. 2004;58:197-288.
- Hoagland K, Schad G. Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale: life history parameters and epidemiological implications of two sympatric hookworms of humans. Exp Parasitol. 1978;44:36-49.
- Clements ACA, Alene KA. Global distribution of human hookworm species and differences in their morbidity effects: a systematic review. Lancet Microbe. 2022;3:E72-E79.
- Loukas A, Hotez PJ, Diemert D, et al. Hookworm infection. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2:1-18.
- Gazzinelli A, Correa-Oliveira R, Yang GJ, et al. A research agenda for helminth diseases of humans: social ecology, environmental determinants, and health systems. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6:E1603.
- Starr MC, Montgomery SP. Soil-transmitted helminthiasis in the United States: a systematic review—1940-2010. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2011;85:680-684.
- Strunz EC, Addiss DG, Stocks ME, et al. Water, sanitation, hygiene, and soil-transmitted helminth infection: a systematic review and metaanalysis. PLoS Med. 2014;11:E1001620.
- Liotta JL, Youn H, Aksel S, et al. Prevalence of Ancylostoma braziliense in dogs from Alachua and Marion Counties, Florida, United States. J Parasitol. 2012;98:1039-1040.
- Hotez PJ, Brooker S, Bethony JM, et al. Hookworm infection. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:799-807.
- Prickett KA, Ferringer TC. What’s eating you? cutaneous larva migrans. Cutis. 2015;95:126-128.
- Feldmeier H, Schuster A. Mini review: hookworm-related cutaneous larva migrans. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2012;31:915-918.
- Tan SK, Liu TT. Cutaneous larva migrans complicated by Löffler syndrome. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:210-212.
- Eksomtramage T, Aiempanakit K. Bullous and pustular cutaneous larva migrans: two case reports and a literature review. IDCases. 2018;12:130-132.
- Utzinger J, Rinaldi L, Lohourignon LK, et al. FLOTAC: a new sensitive technique for the diagnosis of hookworm infections in humans. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2008;102:84-90.
- Chidambaram M, Parija SC, Toi PC, et al. Evaluation of the utility of conventional polymerase chain reaction for detection and species differentiation in human hookworm infections. Trop Parasitol. 2017;7:111-116.
- Gaze S, McSorley HJ, Daveson J, et al. Characterising the mucosal and systemic immune responses to experimental human hookworm infection. PLoS Pathog. 2012;8:E1002520.
- Croese J, O’Neil J, Masson J, et al. A proof of concept study establishing Necator americanus in Crohn’s patients and reservoir donors. Gut. 2006;55:136-137.
- Mpairwe H, Amoah AS. Parasites and allergy: observations from Africa. Parasite Immunol. 2019;41:E12589.
- Albonico M, Savioli L. Hookworm: a neglected resurgent infection. Editorial. BMJ. 2017;359:j4813.
- McKenna ML, McAtee S, Bryan PE, et al. Human intestinal parasite burden and poor sanitation in rural Alabama. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2017;97:1623-1628.
- Traversa D. Pet roundworms and hookworms: a continuing need for global worming. Parasit Vectors. 2012;5:1-19.
- Geerts S, Gryseels B. Drug resistance in human helminths: current situation and lessons from livestock. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2000;13:207-222.
- Jimenez Castro PD, Howell SB, Schaefer JJ, et al. Multiple drug resistance in the canine hookworm Ancylostoma caninum: an emerging threat? Parasit Vectors. 2019;12:1-15.
- Vos T, Abajobir AA, Abate KH, et al. Global, regional, and national incidence, prevalence, and years lived with disability for 328 diseases and injuries for 195 countries, 1990-2016: a systematic analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study 2016. Lancet. 2017;390:1211-1259.
- Bartsch SM, Hotez PJ, Asti L, et al. The global economic and health burden of human hookworm infection. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2016;10:E0004922.
- Seguel M, Gottdenker N. The diversity and impact of hookworm infections in wildlife. Int J Parasitol Parasites Wildl. 2017;6:177-194.
- Adams BJ, Peat SM, Dillman AR. Phylogeny and evolution. In: Entomopathogenic Nematodes: Systematics, Phylogeny and Bacterial Symbionts. Brill; 2010:693-733.
- Heukelbach J, Feldmeier H. Epidemiological and clinical characteristics of hookworm-related cutaneous larva migrans. Lancet Infect Dis. 2008;8:302-309.
- Haas W, Haberl B, Idris I, et al. Infective larvae of the human hookworms Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale differ in their orientation behaviour when crawling on surfaces. Parasitol Res. 2005;95:25-29.
- Hotez P, Narasimhan S, Haggerty J, et al. Hyaluronidase from infective Ancylostoma hookworm larvae and its possible function as a virulence factor in tissue invasion and in cutaneous larva migrans. Infect Immun. 1992;60:1018-1023.
- Brooker S, Bethony J, Hotez PJ. Human hookworm infection in the 21st century. Adv Parasitol. 2004;58:197-288.
- Hoagland K, Schad G. Necator americanus and Ancylostoma duodenale: life history parameters and epidemiological implications of two sympatric hookworms of humans. Exp Parasitol. 1978;44:36-49.
- Clements ACA, Alene KA. Global distribution of human hookworm species and differences in their morbidity effects: a systematic review. Lancet Microbe. 2022;3:E72-E79.
- Loukas A, Hotez PJ, Diemert D, et al. Hookworm infection. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2:1-18.
- Gazzinelli A, Correa-Oliveira R, Yang GJ, et al. A research agenda for helminth diseases of humans: social ecology, environmental determinants, and health systems. PLoS Negl Trop Dis. 2012;6:E1603.
- Starr MC, Montgomery SP. Soil-transmitted helminthiasis in the United States: a systematic review—1940-2010. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2011;85:680-684.
- Strunz EC, Addiss DG, Stocks ME, et al. Water, sanitation, hygiene, and soil-transmitted helminth infection: a systematic review and metaanalysis. PLoS Med. 2014;11:E1001620.
- Liotta JL, Youn H, Aksel S, et al. Prevalence of Ancylostoma braziliense in dogs from Alachua and Marion Counties, Florida, United States. J Parasitol. 2012;98:1039-1040.
- Hotez PJ, Brooker S, Bethony JM, et al. Hookworm infection. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:799-807.
- Prickett KA, Ferringer TC. What’s eating you? cutaneous larva migrans. Cutis. 2015;95:126-128.
- Feldmeier H, Schuster A. Mini review: hookworm-related cutaneous larva migrans. Eur J Clin Microbiol Infect Dis. 2012;31:915-918.
- Tan SK, Liu TT. Cutaneous larva migrans complicated by Löffler syndrome. Arch Dermatol. 2010;146:210-212.
- Eksomtramage T, Aiempanakit K. Bullous and pustular cutaneous larva migrans: two case reports and a literature review. IDCases. 2018;12:130-132.
- Utzinger J, Rinaldi L, Lohourignon LK, et al. FLOTAC: a new sensitive technique for the diagnosis of hookworm infections in humans. Trans R Soc Trop Med Hyg. 2008;102:84-90.
- Chidambaram M, Parija SC, Toi PC, et al. Evaluation of the utility of conventional polymerase chain reaction for detection and species differentiation in human hookworm infections. Trop Parasitol. 2017;7:111-116.
- Gaze S, McSorley HJ, Daveson J, et al. Characterising the mucosal and systemic immune responses to experimental human hookworm infection. PLoS Pathog. 2012;8:E1002520.
- Croese J, O’Neil J, Masson J, et al. A proof of concept study establishing Necator americanus in Crohn’s patients and reservoir donors. Gut. 2006;55:136-137.
- Mpairwe H, Amoah AS. Parasites and allergy: observations from Africa. Parasite Immunol. 2019;41:E12589.
- Albonico M, Savioli L. Hookworm: a neglected resurgent infection. Editorial. BMJ. 2017;359:j4813.
- McKenna ML, McAtee S, Bryan PE, et al. Human intestinal parasite burden and poor sanitation in rural Alabama. Am J Trop Med Hyg. 2017;97:1623-1628.
- Traversa D. Pet roundworms and hookworms: a continuing need for global worming. Parasit Vectors. 2012;5:1-19.
- Geerts S, Gryseels B. Drug resistance in human helminths: current situation and lessons from livestock. Clin Microbiol Rev. 2000;13:207-222.
- Jimenez Castro PD, Howell SB, Schaefer JJ, et al. Multiple drug resistance in the canine hookworm Ancylostoma caninum: an emerging threat? Parasit Vectors. 2019;12:1-15.
What’s Eating You? Hookworm and
Cutaneous Larva Migrans
What’s Eating You? Hookworm and
Cutaneous Larva Migrans
PRACTICE POINTS
- Anthropophilic hookworm infection should be considered with evidence of either transient ground itch or iron-deficient anemia in individuals who go barefoot, permitting ground-to-skin transmission.
- Zoonotic hookworm infection manifests as cutaneous larva migrans, an elevated serpiginous rash that, while usually self-resolving, can be intensely pruritic and should be treated accordingly.
- Considered a neglected tropical disease, hookworm infection still represents an enormous global disease burden. In addition to ongoing afflicted regions, hookworms are making a resurgence in developed nations, and drug-resistant strains have evolved.
Asteraceae Dermatitis: Everyday Plants With Allergenic Potential
The Asteraceae (formerly Compositae) family of plants is derived from the ancient Greek word aster, meaning “star,” referring to the starlike arrangement of flower petals around a central disc known as a capitulum. What initially appears as a single flower is actually a composite of several smaller flowers, hence the former name Compositae.1 Well-known members of the Asteraceae family include ornamental annuals (eg, sunflowers, marigolds, cosmos), herbaceous perennials (eg, chrysanthemums, dandelions), vegetables (eg, lettuce, chicory, artichokes), herbs (eg, chamomile, tarragon), and weeds (eg, ragweed, horseweed, capeweed)(Figure 1).2

There are more than 25,000 species of Asteraceae plants that thrive in a wide range of climates worldwide. Cases of Asteraceae-induced skin reactions have been reported in North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia.3 Members of the Asteraceae family are ubiquitous in gardens, along roadsides, and in the wilderness. Occupational exposure commonly affects gardeners, florists, farmers, and forestry workers through either direct contact with plants or via airborne pollen. Furthermore, plants of the Asteraceae family are used in various products, including pediculicides (eg, insect repellents), cosmetics (eg, eye creams, body washes), and food products (eg, cooking oils, sweetening agents, coffee substitutes, herbal teas).4-6 These plants have substantial allergic potential, resulting in numerous cutaneous reactions.
Allergic Potential
Asteraceae plants can elicit both immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs); for instance, exposure to ragweed pollen may cause an IgE-mediated type 1 HSR manifesting as allergic rhinitis or a type IV HSR manifesting as airborne allergic contact dermatitis.7,8 The main contact allergens present in Asteraceae plants are sesquiterpene lactones, which are found in the leaves, stems, flowers, and pollen.9-11 Sesquiterpene lactones consist of an α-methyl group attached to a lactone ring combined with a sesquiterpene.12 Patch testing can be used to diagnose Asteraceae allergy; however, the results are not consistently reliable because there is no perfect screening allergen. Patch test preparations commonly used to detect Asteraceae allergy include Compositae mix (consisting of Anthemis nobilis extract, Chamomilla recutita extract, Achillea millefolium extract, Tanacetum vulgare extract, Arnica montana extract, and parthenolide) and sesquiterpene lactone mix (consisting of alantolactone, dehydrocostus lactone, and costunolide). In North America, the prevalence of positive patch tests to Compositae mix and sesquiterpene lactone mix is approximately 2% and 0.5%, respectively.13 When patch testing is performed, both Compositae mix and sesquiterpene lactone mix should be utilized to minimize the risk of missing Asteraceae allergy, as sesquiterpene lactone mix alone does not detect all Compositae-sensitized patients. Additionally, it may be necessary to test supplemental Asteraceae allergens, including preparations from specific plants to which the patient has been exposed. Exposure to Asteraceae-containing cosmetic products may lead to dermatitis, though this is highly dependent on the particular plant species involved. For instance, the prevalence of sensitization is high in arnica (tincture) and elecampane but low with more commonly used species such as German chamomile.14
Cutaneous Manifestations
Asteraceae dermatitis, which also is known as Australian bush dermatitis, weed dermatitis, and chrysanthemum dermatitis,2 can manifest on any area of the body that directly contacts the plant or is exposed to the pollen. Asteraceae dermatitis historically was reported in older adults with a recent history of plant exposure.6,15 However, recent data have shown a female preponderance and a younger mean age of onset (46–49 years).16
There are multiple distinct clinical manifestations of Asteraceae dermatitis. The most common cutaneous finding is localized vesicular or eczematous patches on the hands or wrists. Other variations include eczematous rashes on the exposed skin of the hands, arms, face, and neck; generalized eczema; and isolated facial eczema.16,17 These variations can be attributed to contact dermatitis caused by airborne pollen, which may mimic photodermatitis. However, airborne Asteraceae dermatitis can be distinguished clinically from photodermatitis by the involvement of sun-protected areas such as the skinfolds of the eyelids, retroauricular sulci, and nasolabial folds (Figure 2).2,9 In rare cases, systemic allergic contact dermatitis can occur if the Asteraceae allergen is ingested.2,18

Other diagnostic clues include dermatitis that flares during the summer, at the peak of the growing season, with remission in the cooler months. Potential risk factors include a childhood history of atopic dermatitis and allergic rhinitis.16 With prolonged exposure, patients may develop chronic actinic dermatitis, an immunologically mediated photodermatosis characterized by lichenified and pruritic eczematous plaques located predominantly on sun-exposed areas with notable sparing of the skin folds.19 The association between Asteraceae dermatitis and chronic actinic dermatitis is highly variable, with some studies reporting a 25% correlation and others finding a stronger association of up to 80%.2,15,20 Asteraceae allergy appears to be a relatively uncommon cause of photoallergy in North America. In one recent study, 16% (3/19) of patients with chronic actinic dermatitis had positive patch or photopatch tests to sesquiterpene lactone mix, but in another large study of photopatch testing it was reported to be a rare photoallergen.21,22
Parthenium dermatitis is an allergic contact dermatitis caused by exposure to Parthenium hysterophorus, a weed of the Asteraceae family that is responsible for 30% of cases of contact dermatitis in India.23,24 Unlike the more classic manifestation of Asteraceae dermatitis, which primarily affects the upper extremities in cases from North America and Europe, Parthenium dermatitis typically occurs in an airborne pattern distribution.24
Management
While complete avoidance of Asteraceae plants is ideal, it often is unrealistic due to their abundance in nature. Therefore, minimizing exposure to the causative plants is recommended. Primary preventive measures such as wearing protective gloves and clothing and applying bentonite clay prior to exposure should be taken when working outdoors. Promptly showering after contact with plants also can reduce the risk for Asteraceae dermatitis.
Symptomatic treatment is appropriate for mild cases and includes topical corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors. For severe cases, systemic corticosteroids may be needed for acute flares, with azathioprine, mycophenolate, cyclosporine, or methotrexate available for recalcitrant disease. Verma et al25 found that treatment with azathioprine for 6 months resulted in greater than 60% clearance in all 12 patients, with a majority achieving 80% to 100% clearance. Methotrexate has been used at doses of 15 mg once weekly.26 Narrowband UVB and psoralen plus UVA have been effective in extensive cases; however, care should be exercised in patients with photosensitive dermatitis, who instead should practice strict photoprotection.27-29 Lakshmi et al30 reported the use of cyclosporine during the acute phase of Asteraceae dermatitis at a dose of 2.5 mg/kg daily for 4 to 8 weeks. There have been several case reports of dupilumab treating allergic contact dermatitis; however, there have been 3 cases of patients with atopic dermatitis developing Asteraceae dermatitis while taking dupilumab.31,32 Recently, oral Janus kinase inhibitors have shown success in treating refractory cases of airborne Asteraceae dermatitis.33,34 Further research is needed to determine the safety and efficacy of dupilumab and Janus kinase inhibitors for treatment of Asteraceae dermatitis.
Final Thoughts
The Asteraceae plant family is vast and diverse, with more than 200 species reported to cause allergic contact dermatitis.12 Common modes of contact include gardening, occupational exposure, airborne pollen, and use of pediculicides and cosmetics that contain components of Asteraceae plants. Educating patients on how to minimize contact with Asteraceae plants is the most effective management strategy; topical agents and oral immunosuppressives can be used for symptomatic treatment.
- Morhardt S, Morhardt E. California Desert Flowers: An Introduction to Families, Genera, and Species. University of California Press; 2004.
- Gordon LA. Compositae dermatitis. Australas J Dermatol. 1999;40:123-130. doi:10.1046/j.1440-0960.1999.00341.x
- Denisow-Pietrzyk M, Pietrzyk Ł, Denisow B. Asteraceae species as potential environmental factors of allergy. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2019;26:6290-6300. doi:10.1007/s11356-019-04146-w
- Paulsen E, Chistensen LP, Andersen KE. Cosmetics and herbal remedies with Compositae plant extracts—are they tolerated by Compositae-allergic patients? Contact Dermatitis. 2008;58:15-23. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01250.x
- Burry JN, Reid JG, Kirk J. Australian bush dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1975;1:263-264. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1975.tb05422.x
- Punchihewa N, Palmer A, Nixon R. Allergic contact dermatitis to Compositae: an Australian case series. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;87:356-362. doi:10.1111/cod.14162
- Chen KW, Marusciac L, Tamas PT, et al. Ragweed pollen allergy: burden, characteristics, and management of an imported allergen source in Europe. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2018;176:163-180. doi:10.1159/000487997
- Schloemer JA, Zirwas MJ, Burkhart CG. Airborne contact dermatitis: common causes in the USA. Int J Dermatol. 2015;54:271-274. doi:10.1111/ijd.12692
- Arlette J, Mitchell JC. Compositae dermatitis. current aspects. Contact Dermatitis. 1981;7:129-136. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1981.tb04584.x
- Mitchell JC, Dupuis G. Allergic contact dermatitis from sesquiterpenoids of the Compositae family of plants. Br J Dermatol. 1971;84:139-150. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.1971.tb06857.x
- Salapovic H, Geier J, Reznicek G. Quantification of Sesquiterpene lactones in Asteraceae plant extracts: evaluation of their allergenic potential. Sci Pharm. 2013;81:807-818. doi:10.3797/scipharm.1306-17
- Paulsen E. Compositae dermatitis: a survey. Contact Dermatitis. 1992;26:76-86. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1992.tb00888.x. Published correction appears in Contact Dermatitis. 1992;27:208.
- DeKoven JG, Silverberg JI, Warshaw EM, et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch test results: 2017-2018. Dermatitis. 2021;32:111-123. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000729
- Paulsen E. Contact sensitization from Compositae-containing herbal remedies and cosmetics. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;47:189-198. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0536.2002.470401.x
- Frain-Bell W, Johnson BE. Contact allergic sensitivity to plants and the photosensitivity dermatitis and actinic reticuloid syndrome. Br J Dermatol. 1979;101:503-512.
- Paulsen E, Andersen KE. Clinical patterns of Compositae dermatitis in Danish monosensitized patients. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78:185-193. doi:10.1111/cod.12916
- Jovanovic´ M, Poljacki M. Compositae dermatitis. Med Pregl. 2003;56:43-49. doi:10.2298/mpns0302043j
- Krook G. Occupational dermatitis from Lactuca sativa (lettuce) and Cichorium (endive). simultaneous occurrence of immediate and delayed allergy as a cause of contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1977;3:27-36. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1977.tb03583.x
- Paek SY, Lim HW. Chronic actinic dermatitis. Dermatol Clin. 2014;32:355-361, viii-ix. doi:10.1016/j.det.2014.03.007
- du P Menagé H, Hawk JL, White IR. Sesquiterpene lactone mix contact sensitivity and its relationship to chronic actinic dermatitis: a follow-up study. Contact Dermatitis. 1998;39:119-122. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1998.tb05859.x
- Wang CX, Belsito DV. Chronic actinic dermatitis revisited. Dermatitis. 2020;31:68-74. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000531
- DeLeo VA, Adler BL, Warshaw EM, et al. Photopatch test results of the North American contact dermatitis group, 1999-2009. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed. 2022;38:288-291. doi:10.1111/phpp.12742
- McGovern TW, LaWarre S. Botanical briefs: the scourge of India—Parthenium hysterophorus L. Cutis. 2001;67:27-34. Published correction appears in Cutis. 2001;67:154.
- Sharma VK, Verma P, Maharaja K. Parthenium dermatitis. Photochem Photobiol Sci. 2013;12:85-94. doi:10.1039/c2pp25186h
- Verma KK, Bansal A, Sethuraman G. Parthenium dermatitis treated with azathioprine weekly pulse doses. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2006;72:24-27. doi:10.4103/0378-6323.19713
- Sharma VK, Bhat R, Sethuraman G, et al. Treatment of Parthenium dermatitis with methotrexate. Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57:118-119. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2006.00950.x
- Burke DA, Corey G, Storrs FJ. Psoralen plus UVA protocol for Compositae photosensitivity. Am J Contact Dermat. 1996;7:171-176.
- Lovell CR. Allergic contact dermatitis due to plants. In: Plants and the Skin. Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1993:96-254.
- Dogra S, Parsad D, Handa S. Narrowband ultraviolet B in airborne contact dermatitis: a ray of hope! Br J Dermatol. 2004;150:373-374. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2004.05724.x
- Lakshmi C, Srinivas CR, Jayaraman A. Ciclosporin in Parthenium dermatitis—a report of 2 cases. Contact Dermatitis. 2008;59:245-248. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01208.x
- Hendricks AJ, Yosipovitch G, Shi VY. Dupilumab use in dermatologic conditions beyond atopic dermatitis—a systematic review. J Dermatolog Treat. 2021;32:19-28. doi:10.1080/09546634.2019.1689227
- Napolitano M, Fabbrocini G, Patruno C. Allergic contact dermatitis to Compositae: a possible cause of dupilumab-associated facial and neck dermatitis in atopic dermatitis patients? Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:473-474. doi:10.1111/cod.13898
- Muddebihal A, Sardana K, Sinha S, et al. Tofacitinib in refractory Parthenium-induced airborne allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;88:150-152. doi:10.1111/cod.14234
- Baltazar D, Shinamoto SR, Hamann CP, et al. Occupational airborne allergic contact dermatitis to invasive Compositae species treated with abrocitinib: a case report. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;87:542-544. doi:10.1111/cod.14204
The Asteraceae (formerly Compositae) family of plants is derived from the ancient Greek word aster, meaning “star,” referring to the starlike arrangement of flower petals around a central disc known as a capitulum. What initially appears as a single flower is actually a composite of several smaller flowers, hence the former name Compositae.1 Well-known members of the Asteraceae family include ornamental annuals (eg, sunflowers, marigolds, cosmos), herbaceous perennials (eg, chrysanthemums, dandelions), vegetables (eg, lettuce, chicory, artichokes), herbs (eg, chamomile, tarragon), and weeds (eg, ragweed, horseweed, capeweed)(Figure 1).2

There are more than 25,000 species of Asteraceae plants that thrive in a wide range of climates worldwide. Cases of Asteraceae-induced skin reactions have been reported in North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia.3 Members of the Asteraceae family are ubiquitous in gardens, along roadsides, and in the wilderness. Occupational exposure commonly affects gardeners, florists, farmers, and forestry workers through either direct contact with plants or via airborne pollen. Furthermore, plants of the Asteraceae family are used in various products, including pediculicides (eg, insect repellents), cosmetics (eg, eye creams, body washes), and food products (eg, cooking oils, sweetening agents, coffee substitutes, herbal teas).4-6 These plants have substantial allergic potential, resulting in numerous cutaneous reactions.
Allergic Potential
Asteraceae plants can elicit both immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs); for instance, exposure to ragweed pollen may cause an IgE-mediated type 1 HSR manifesting as allergic rhinitis or a type IV HSR manifesting as airborne allergic contact dermatitis.7,8 The main contact allergens present in Asteraceae plants are sesquiterpene lactones, which are found in the leaves, stems, flowers, and pollen.9-11 Sesquiterpene lactones consist of an α-methyl group attached to a lactone ring combined with a sesquiterpene.12 Patch testing can be used to diagnose Asteraceae allergy; however, the results are not consistently reliable because there is no perfect screening allergen. Patch test preparations commonly used to detect Asteraceae allergy include Compositae mix (consisting of Anthemis nobilis extract, Chamomilla recutita extract, Achillea millefolium extract, Tanacetum vulgare extract, Arnica montana extract, and parthenolide) and sesquiterpene lactone mix (consisting of alantolactone, dehydrocostus lactone, and costunolide). In North America, the prevalence of positive patch tests to Compositae mix and sesquiterpene lactone mix is approximately 2% and 0.5%, respectively.13 When patch testing is performed, both Compositae mix and sesquiterpene lactone mix should be utilized to minimize the risk of missing Asteraceae allergy, as sesquiterpene lactone mix alone does not detect all Compositae-sensitized patients. Additionally, it may be necessary to test supplemental Asteraceae allergens, including preparations from specific plants to which the patient has been exposed. Exposure to Asteraceae-containing cosmetic products may lead to dermatitis, though this is highly dependent on the particular plant species involved. For instance, the prevalence of sensitization is high in arnica (tincture) and elecampane but low with more commonly used species such as German chamomile.14
Cutaneous Manifestations
Asteraceae dermatitis, which also is known as Australian bush dermatitis, weed dermatitis, and chrysanthemum dermatitis,2 can manifest on any area of the body that directly contacts the plant or is exposed to the pollen. Asteraceae dermatitis historically was reported in older adults with a recent history of plant exposure.6,15 However, recent data have shown a female preponderance and a younger mean age of onset (46–49 years).16
There are multiple distinct clinical manifestations of Asteraceae dermatitis. The most common cutaneous finding is localized vesicular or eczematous patches on the hands or wrists. Other variations include eczematous rashes on the exposed skin of the hands, arms, face, and neck; generalized eczema; and isolated facial eczema.16,17 These variations can be attributed to contact dermatitis caused by airborne pollen, which may mimic photodermatitis. However, airborne Asteraceae dermatitis can be distinguished clinically from photodermatitis by the involvement of sun-protected areas such as the skinfolds of the eyelids, retroauricular sulci, and nasolabial folds (Figure 2).2,9 In rare cases, systemic allergic contact dermatitis can occur if the Asteraceae allergen is ingested.2,18

Other diagnostic clues include dermatitis that flares during the summer, at the peak of the growing season, with remission in the cooler months. Potential risk factors include a childhood history of atopic dermatitis and allergic rhinitis.16 With prolonged exposure, patients may develop chronic actinic dermatitis, an immunologically mediated photodermatosis characterized by lichenified and pruritic eczematous plaques located predominantly on sun-exposed areas with notable sparing of the skin folds.19 The association between Asteraceae dermatitis and chronic actinic dermatitis is highly variable, with some studies reporting a 25% correlation and others finding a stronger association of up to 80%.2,15,20 Asteraceae allergy appears to be a relatively uncommon cause of photoallergy in North America. In one recent study, 16% (3/19) of patients with chronic actinic dermatitis had positive patch or photopatch tests to sesquiterpene lactone mix, but in another large study of photopatch testing it was reported to be a rare photoallergen.21,22
Parthenium dermatitis is an allergic contact dermatitis caused by exposure to Parthenium hysterophorus, a weed of the Asteraceae family that is responsible for 30% of cases of contact dermatitis in India.23,24 Unlike the more classic manifestation of Asteraceae dermatitis, which primarily affects the upper extremities in cases from North America and Europe, Parthenium dermatitis typically occurs in an airborne pattern distribution.24
Management
While complete avoidance of Asteraceae plants is ideal, it often is unrealistic due to their abundance in nature. Therefore, minimizing exposure to the causative plants is recommended. Primary preventive measures such as wearing protective gloves and clothing and applying bentonite clay prior to exposure should be taken when working outdoors. Promptly showering after contact with plants also can reduce the risk for Asteraceae dermatitis.
Symptomatic treatment is appropriate for mild cases and includes topical corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors. For severe cases, systemic corticosteroids may be needed for acute flares, with azathioprine, mycophenolate, cyclosporine, or methotrexate available for recalcitrant disease. Verma et al25 found that treatment with azathioprine for 6 months resulted in greater than 60% clearance in all 12 patients, with a majority achieving 80% to 100% clearance. Methotrexate has been used at doses of 15 mg once weekly.26 Narrowband UVB and psoralen plus UVA have been effective in extensive cases; however, care should be exercised in patients with photosensitive dermatitis, who instead should practice strict photoprotection.27-29 Lakshmi et al30 reported the use of cyclosporine during the acute phase of Asteraceae dermatitis at a dose of 2.5 mg/kg daily for 4 to 8 weeks. There have been several case reports of dupilumab treating allergic contact dermatitis; however, there have been 3 cases of patients with atopic dermatitis developing Asteraceae dermatitis while taking dupilumab.31,32 Recently, oral Janus kinase inhibitors have shown success in treating refractory cases of airborne Asteraceae dermatitis.33,34 Further research is needed to determine the safety and efficacy of dupilumab and Janus kinase inhibitors for treatment of Asteraceae dermatitis.
Final Thoughts
The Asteraceae plant family is vast and diverse, with more than 200 species reported to cause allergic contact dermatitis.12 Common modes of contact include gardening, occupational exposure, airborne pollen, and use of pediculicides and cosmetics that contain components of Asteraceae plants. Educating patients on how to minimize contact with Asteraceae plants is the most effective management strategy; topical agents and oral immunosuppressives can be used for symptomatic treatment.
The Asteraceae (formerly Compositae) family of plants is derived from the ancient Greek word aster, meaning “star,” referring to the starlike arrangement of flower petals around a central disc known as a capitulum. What initially appears as a single flower is actually a composite of several smaller flowers, hence the former name Compositae.1 Well-known members of the Asteraceae family include ornamental annuals (eg, sunflowers, marigolds, cosmos), herbaceous perennials (eg, chrysanthemums, dandelions), vegetables (eg, lettuce, chicory, artichokes), herbs (eg, chamomile, tarragon), and weeds (eg, ragweed, horseweed, capeweed)(Figure 1).2

There are more than 25,000 species of Asteraceae plants that thrive in a wide range of climates worldwide. Cases of Asteraceae-induced skin reactions have been reported in North America, Europe, Asia, and Australia.3 Members of the Asteraceae family are ubiquitous in gardens, along roadsides, and in the wilderness. Occupational exposure commonly affects gardeners, florists, farmers, and forestry workers through either direct contact with plants or via airborne pollen. Furthermore, plants of the Asteraceae family are used in various products, including pediculicides (eg, insect repellents), cosmetics (eg, eye creams, body washes), and food products (eg, cooking oils, sweetening agents, coffee substitutes, herbal teas).4-6 These plants have substantial allergic potential, resulting in numerous cutaneous reactions.
Allergic Potential
Asteraceae plants can elicit both immediate and delayed hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs); for instance, exposure to ragweed pollen may cause an IgE-mediated type 1 HSR manifesting as allergic rhinitis or a type IV HSR manifesting as airborne allergic contact dermatitis.7,8 The main contact allergens present in Asteraceae plants are sesquiterpene lactones, which are found in the leaves, stems, flowers, and pollen.9-11 Sesquiterpene lactones consist of an α-methyl group attached to a lactone ring combined with a sesquiterpene.12 Patch testing can be used to diagnose Asteraceae allergy; however, the results are not consistently reliable because there is no perfect screening allergen. Patch test preparations commonly used to detect Asteraceae allergy include Compositae mix (consisting of Anthemis nobilis extract, Chamomilla recutita extract, Achillea millefolium extract, Tanacetum vulgare extract, Arnica montana extract, and parthenolide) and sesquiterpene lactone mix (consisting of alantolactone, dehydrocostus lactone, and costunolide). In North America, the prevalence of positive patch tests to Compositae mix and sesquiterpene lactone mix is approximately 2% and 0.5%, respectively.13 When patch testing is performed, both Compositae mix and sesquiterpene lactone mix should be utilized to minimize the risk of missing Asteraceae allergy, as sesquiterpene lactone mix alone does not detect all Compositae-sensitized patients. Additionally, it may be necessary to test supplemental Asteraceae allergens, including preparations from specific plants to which the patient has been exposed. Exposure to Asteraceae-containing cosmetic products may lead to dermatitis, though this is highly dependent on the particular plant species involved. For instance, the prevalence of sensitization is high in arnica (tincture) and elecampane but low with more commonly used species such as German chamomile.14
Cutaneous Manifestations
Asteraceae dermatitis, which also is known as Australian bush dermatitis, weed dermatitis, and chrysanthemum dermatitis,2 can manifest on any area of the body that directly contacts the plant or is exposed to the pollen. Asteraceae dermatitis historically was reported in older adults with a recent history of plant exposure.6,15 However, recent data have shown a female preponderance and a younger mean age of onset (46–49 years).16
There are multiple distinct clinical manifestations of Asteraceae dermatitis. The most common cutaneous finding is localized vesicular or eczematous patches on the hands or wrists. Other variations include eczematous rashes on the exposed skin of the hands, arms, face, and neck; generalized eczema; and isolated facial eczema.16,17 These variations can be attributed to contact dermatitis caused by airborne pollen, which may mimic photodermatitis. However, airborne Asteraceae dermatitis can be distinguished clinically from photodermatitis by the involvement of sun-protected areas such as the skinfolds of the eyelids, retroauricular sulci, and nasolabial folds (Figure 2).2,9 In rare cases, systemic allergic contact dermatitis can occur if the Asteraceae allergen is ingested.2,18

Other diagnostic clues include dermatitis that flares during the summer, at the peak of the growing season, with remission in the cooler months. Potential risk factors include a childhood history of atopic dermatitis and allergic rhinitis.16 With prolonged exposure, patients may develop chronic actinic dermatitis, an immunologically mediated photodermatosis characterized by lichenified and pruritic eczematous plaques located predominantly on sun-exposed areas with notable sparing of the skin folds.19 The association between Asteraceae dermatitis and chronic actinic dermatitis is highly variable, with some studies reporting a 25% correlation and others finding a stronger association of up to 80%.2,15,20 Asteraceae allergy appears to be a relatively uncommon cause of photoallergy in North America. In one recent study, 16% (3/19) of patients with chronic actinic dermatitis had positive patch or photopatch tests to sesquiterpene lactone mix, but in another large study of photopatch testing it was reported to be a rare photoallergen.21,22
Parthenium dermatitis is an allergic contact dermatitis caused by exposure to Parthenium hysterophorus, a weed of the Asteraceae family that is responsible for 30% of cases of contact dermatitis in India.23,24 Unlike the more classic manifestation of Asteraceae dermatitis, which primarily affects the upper extremities in cases from North America and Europe, Parthenium dermatitis typically occurs in an airborne pattern distribution.24
Management
While complete avoidance of Asteraceae plants is ideal, it often is unrealistic due to their abundance in nature. Therefore, minimizing exposure to the causative plants is recommended. Primary preventive measures such as wearing protective gloves and clothing and applying bentonite clay prior to exposure should be taken when working outdoors. Promptly showering after contact with plants also can reduce the risk for Asteraceae dermatitis.
Symptomatic treatment is appropriate for mild cases and includes topical corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors. For severe cases, systemic corticosteroids may be needed for acute flares, with azathioprine, mycophenolate, cyclosporine, or methotrexate available for recalcitrant disease. Verma et al25 found that treatment with azathioprine for 6 months resulted in greater than 60% clearance in all 12 patients, with a majority achieving 80% to 100% clearance. Methotrexate has been used at doses of 15 mg once weekly.26 Narrowband UVB and psoralen plus UVA have been effective in extensive cases; however, care should be exercised in patients with photosensitive dermatitis, who instead should practice strict photoprotection.27-29 Lakshmi et al30 reported the use of cyclosporine during the acute phase of Asteraceae dermatitis at a dose of 2.5 mg/kg daily for 4 to 8 weeks. There have been several case reports of dupilumab treating allergic contact dermatitis; however, there have been 3 cases of patients with atopic dermatitis developing Asteraceae dermatitis while taking dupilumab.31,32 Recently, oral Janus kinase inhibitors have shown success in treating refractory cases of airborne Asteraceae dermatitis.33,34 Further research is needed to determine the safety and efficacy of dupilumab and Janus kinase inhibitors for treatment of Asteraceae dermatitis.
Final Thoughts
The Asteraceae plant family is vast and diverse, with more than 200 species reported to cause allergic contact dermatitis.12 Common modes of contact include gardening, occupational exposure, airborne pollen, and use of pediculicides and cosmetics that contain components of Asteraceae plants. Educating patients on how to minimize contact with Asteraceae plants is the most effective management strategy; topical agents and oral immunosuppressives can be used for symptomatic treatment.
- Morhardt S, Morhardt E. California Desert Flowers: An Introduction to Families, Genera, and Species. University of California Press; 2004.
- Gordon LA. Compositae dermatitis. Australas J Dermatol. 1999;40:123-130. doi:10.1046/j.1440-0960.1999.00341.x
- Denisow-Pietrzyk M, Pietrzyk Ł, Denisow B. Asteraceae species as potential environmental factors of allergy. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2019;26:6290-6300. doi:10.1007/s11356-019-04146-w
- Paulsen E, Chistensen LP, Andersen KE. Cosmetics and herbal remedies with Compositae plant extracts—are they tolerated by Compositae-allergic patients? Contact Dermatitis. 2008;58:15-23. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01250.x
- Burry JN, Reid JG, Kirk J. Australian bush dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1975;1:263-264. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1975.tb05422.x
- Punchihewa N, Palmer A, Nixon R. Allergic contact dermatitis to Compositae: an Australian case series. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;87:356-362. doi:10.1111/cod.14162
- Chen KW, Marusciac L, Tamas PT, et al. Ragweed pollen allergy: burden, characteristics, and management of an imported allergen source in Europe. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2018;176:163-180. doi:10.1159/000487997
- Schloemer JA, Zirwas MJ, Burkhart CG. Airborne contact dermatitis: common causes in the USA. Int J Dermatol. 2015;54:271-274. doi:10.1111/ijd.12692
- Arlette J, Mitchell JC. Compositae dermatitis. current aspects. Contact Dermatitis. 1981;7:129-136. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1981.tb04584.x
- Mitchell JC, Dupuis G. Allergic contact dermatitis from sesquiterpenoids of the Compositae family of plants. Br J Dermatol. 1971;84:139-150. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.1971.tb06857.x
- Salapovic H, Geier J, Reznicek G. Quantification of Sesquiterpene lactones in Asteraceae plant extracts: evaluation of their allergenic potential. Sci Pharm. 2013;81:807-818. doi:10.3797/scipharm.1306-17
- Paulsen E. Compositae dermatitis: a survey. Contact Dermatitis. 1992;26:76-86. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1992.tb00888.x. Published correction appears in Contact Dermatitis. 1992;27:208.
- DeKoven JG, Silverberg JI, Warshaw EM, et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch test results: 2017-2018. Dermatitis. 2021;32:111-123. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000729
- Paulsen E. Contact sensitization from Compositae-containing herbal remedies and cosmetics. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;47:189-198. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0536.2002.470401.x
- Frain-Bell W, Johnson BE. Contact allergic sensitivity to plants and the photosensitivity dermatitis and actinic reticuloid syndrome. Br J Dermatol. 1979;101:503-512.
- Paulsen E, Andersen KE. Clinical patterns of Compositae dermatitis in Danish monosensitized patients. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78:185-193. doi:10.1111/cod.12916
- Jovanovic´ M, Poljacki M. Compositae dermatitis. Med Pregl. 2003;56:43-49. doi:10.2298/mpns0302043j
- Krook G. Occupational dermatitis from Lactuca sativa (lettuce) and Cichorium (endive). simultaneous occurrence of immediate and delayed allergy as a cause of contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1977;3:27-36. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1977.tb03583.x
- Paek SY, Lim HW. Chronic actinic dermatitis. Dermatol Clin. 2014;32:355-361, viii-ix. doi:10.1016/j.det.2014.03.007
- du P Menagé H, Hawk JL, White IR. Sesquiterpene lactone mix contact sensitivity and its relationship to chronic actinic dermatitis: a follow-up study. Contact Dermatitis. 1998;39:119-122. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1998.tb05859.x
- Wang CX, Belsito DV. Chronic actinic dermatitis revisited. Dermatitis. 2020;31:68-74. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000531
- DeLeo VA, Adler BL, Warshaw EM, et al. Photopatch test results of the North American contact dermatitis group, 1999-2009. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed. 2022;38:288-291. doi:10.1111/phpp.12742
- McGovern TW, LaWarre S. Botanical briefs: the scourge of India—Parthenium hysterophorus L. Cutis. 2001;67:27-34. Published correction appears in Cutis. 2001;67:154.
- Sharma VK, Verma P, Maharaja K. Parthenium dermatitis. Photochem Photobiol Sci. 2013;12:85-94. doi:10.1039/c2pp25186h
- Verma KK, Bansal A, Sethuraman G. Parthenium dermatitis treated with azathioprine weekly pulse doses. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2006;72:24-27. doi:10.4103/0378-6323.19713
- Sharma VK, Bhat R, Sethuraman G, et al. Treatment of Parthenium dermatitis with methotrexate. Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57:118-119. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2006.00950.x
- Burke DA, Corey G, Storrs FJ. Psoralen plus UVA protocol for Compositae photosensitivity. Am J Contact Dermat. 1996;7:171-176.
- Lovell CR. Allergic contact dermatitis due to plants. In: Plants and the Skin. Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1993:96-254.
- Dogra S, Parsad D, Handa S. Narrowband ultraviolet B in airborne contact dermatitis: a ray of hope! Br J Dermatol. 2004;150:373-374. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2004.05724.x
- Lakshmi C, Srinivas CR, Jayaraman A. Ciclosporin in Parthenium dermatitis—a report of 2 cases. Contact Dermatitis. 2008;59:245-248. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01208.x
- Hendricks AJ, Yosipovitch G, Shi VY. Dupilumab use in dermatologic conditions beyond atopic dermatitis—a systematic review. J Dermatolog Treat. 2021;32:19-28. doi:10.1080/09546634.2019.1689227
- Napolitano M, Fabbrocini G, Patruno C. Allergic contact dermatitis to Compositae: a possible cause of dupilumab-associated facial and neck dermatitis in atopic dermatitis patients? Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:473-474. doi:10.1111/cod.13898
- Muddebihal A, Sardana K, Sinha S, et al. Tofacitinib in refractory Parthenium-induced airborne allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;88:150-152. doi:10.1111/cod.14234
- Baltazar D, Shinamoto SR, Hamann CP, et al. Occupational airborne allergic contact dermatitis to invasive Compositae species treated with abrocitinib: a case report. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;87:542-544. doi:10.1111/cod.14204
- Morhardt S, Morhardt E. California Desert Flowers: An Introduction to Families, Genera, and Species. University of California Press; 2004.
- Gordon LA. Compositae dermatitis. Australas J Dermatol. 1999;40:123-130. doi:10.1046/j.1440-0960.1999.00341.x
- Denisow-Pietrzyk M, Pietrzyk Ł, Denisow B. Asteraceae species as potential environmental factors of allergy. Environ Sci Pollut Res Int. 2019;26:6290-6300. doi:10.1007/s11356-019-04146-w
- Paulsen E, Chistensen LP, Andersen KE. Cosmetics and herbal remedies with Compositae plant extracts—are they tolerated by Compositae-allergic patients? Contact Dermatitis. 2008;58:15-23. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01250.x
- Burry JN, Reid JG, Kirk J. Australian bush dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1975;1:263-264. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1975.tb05422.x
- Punchihewa N, Palmer A, Nixon R. Allergic contact dermatitis to Compositae: an Australian case series. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;87:356-362. doi:10.1111/cod.14162
- Chen KW, Marusciac L, Tamas PT, et al. Ragweed pollen allergy: burden, characteristics, and management of an imported allergen source in Europe. Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2018;176:163-180. doi:10.1159/000487997
- Schloemer JA, Zirwas MJ, Burkhart CG. Airborne contact dermatitis: common causes in the USA. Int J Dermatol. 2015;54:271-274. doi:10.1111/ijd.12692
- Arlette J, Mitchell JC. Compositae dermatitis. current aspects. Contact Dermatitis. 1981;7:129-136. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1981.tb04584.x
- Mitchell JC, Dupuis G. Allergic contact dermatitis from sesquiterpenoids of the Compositae family of plants. Br J Dermatol. 1971;84:139-150. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.1971.tb06857.x
- Salapovic H, Geier J, Reznicek G. Quantification of Sesquiterpene lactones in Asteraceae plant extracts: evaluation of their allergenic potential. Sci Pharm. 2013;81:807-818. doi:10.3797/scipharm.1306-17
- Paulsen E. Compositae dermatitis: a survey. Contact Dermatitis. 1992;26:76-86. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1992.tb00888.x. Published correction appears in Contact Dermatitis. 1992;27:208.
- DeKoven JG, Silverberg JI, Warshaw EM, et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch test results: 2017-2018. Dermatitis. 2021;32:111-123. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000729
- Paulsen E. Contact sensitization from Compositae-containing herbal remedies and cosmetics. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;47:189-198. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0536.2002.470401.x
- Frain-Bell W, Johnson BE. Contact allergic sensitivity to plants and the photosensitivity dermatitis and actinic reticuloid syndrome. Br J Dermatol. 1979;101:503-512.
- Paulsen E, Andersen KE. Clinical patterns of Compositae dermatitis in Danish monosensitized patients. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78:185-193. doi:10.1111/cod.12916
- Jovanovic´ M, Poljacki M. Compositae dermatitis. Med Pregl. 2003;56:43-49. doi:10.2298/mpns0302043j
- Krook G. Occupational dermatitis from Lactuca sativa (lettuce) and Cichorium (endive). simultaneous occurrence of immediate and delayed allergy as a cause of contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1977;3:27-36. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1977.tb03583.x
- Paek SY, Lim HW. Chronic actinic dermatitis. Dermatol Clin. 2014;32:355-361, viii-ix. doi:10.1016/j.det.2014.03.007
- du P Menagé H, Hawk JL, White IR. Sesquiterpene lactone mix contact sensitivity and its relationship to chronic actinic dermatitis: a follow-up study. Contact Dermatitis. 1998;39:119-122. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1998.tb05859.x
- Wang CX, Belsito DV. Chronic actinic dermatitis revisited. Dermatitis. 2020;31:68-74. doi:10.1097/DER.0000000000000531
- DeLeo VA, Adler BL, Warshaw EM, et al. Photopatch test results of the North American contact dermatitis group, 1999-2009. Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed. 2022;38:288-291. doi:10.1111/phpp.12742
- McGovern TW, LaWarre S. Botanical briefs: the scourge of India—Parthenium hysterophorus L. Cutis. 2001;67:27-34. Published correction appears in Cutis. 2001;67:154.
- Sharma VK, Verma P, Maharaja K. Parthenium dermatitis. Photochem Photobiol Sci. 2013;12:85-94. doi:10.1039/c2pp25186h
- Verma KK, Bansal A, Sethuraman G. Parthenium dermatitis treated with azathioprine weekly pulse doses. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2006;72:24-27. doi:10.4103/0378-6323.19713
- Sharma VK, Bhat R, Sethuraman G, et al. Treatment of Parthenium dermatitis with methotrexate. Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57:118-119. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2006.00950.x
- Burke DA, Corey G, Storrs FJ. Psoralen plus UVA protocol for Compositae photosensitivity. Am J Contact Dermat. 1996;7:171-176.
- Lovell CR. Allergic contact dermatitis due to plants. In: Plants and the Skin. Blackwell Scientific Publications; 1993:96-254.
- Dogra S, Parsad D, Handa S. Narrowband ultraviolet B in airborne contact dermatitis: a ray of hope! Br J Dermatol. 2004;150:373-374. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2133.2004.05724.x
- Lakshmi C, Srinivas CR, Jayaraman A. Ciclosporin in Parthenium dermatitis—a report of 2 cases. Contact Dermatitis. 2008;59:245-248. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01208.x
- Hendricks AJ, Yosipovitch G, Shi VY. Dupilumab use in dermatologic conditions beyond atopic dermatitis—a systematic review. J Dermatolog Treat. 2021;32:19-28. doi:10.1080/09546634.2019.1689227
- Napolitano M, Fabbrocini G, Patruno C. Allergic contact dermatitis to Compositae: a possible cause of dupilumab-associated facial and neck dermatitis in atopic dermatitis patients? Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:473-474. doi:10.1111/cod.13898
- Muddebihal A, Sardana K, Sinha S, et al. Tofacitinib in refractory Parthenium-induced airborne allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2023;88:150-152. doi:10.1111/cod.14234
- Baltazar D, Shinamoto SR, Hamann CP, et al. Occupational airborne allergic contact dermatitis to invasive Compositae species treated with abrocitinib: a case report. Contact Dermatitis. 2022;87:542-544. doi:10.1111/cod.14204
Practice Points
- Asteraceae dermatitis can occur from direct contact with plants of the Asteraceae family; through airborne pollen; or from exposure to topical medications, cooking products, and cosmetics.
- Patient education on primary prevention, especially protective clothing, is crucial, as these plants are ubiquitous outdoors and have diverse phenotypes.
- Management of mild Asteraceae dermatitis consists primarily of topical corticosteroids and calcineurin inhibitors, while systemic corticosteroids and other immunosuppressive agents are utilized for severe or recalcitrant cases.
Western Pygmy Rattlesnake Envenomation and Bite Management
There are 375 species of poisonous snakes, with approximately 20,000 deaths worldwide each year due to snakebites, mostly in Asia and Africa.1 The death rate in the United States is 14 to 20 cases per year. In the United States, a variety of rattlesnakes are poisonous. There are 2 genera of rattlesnakes: Sistrurus (3 species) and Crotalus (23 species). The pygmy rattlesnake belongs to the Sistrurus miliarius species that is divided into 3 subspecies: the Carolina pigmy rattlesnake (S miliarius miliarius), the western pygmy rattlesnake (S miliarius streckeri), and the dusky pygmy rattlesnake (S miliarius barbouri).2
The western pygmy rattlesnake belongs to the Crotalidae family. The rattlesnakes in this family also are known as pit vipers. All pit vipers have common characteristics for identification: triangular head, fangs, elliptical pupils, and a heat-sensing pit between the eyes. The western pygmy rattlesnake is found in Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kentucky, and Tennessee.1 It is small bodied (15–20 inches)3 and grayish-brown, with a brown dorsal stripe with black blotches on its back. It is found in glades, second-growth forests near rock ledges, and areas where powerlines cut through dense forest.3 Its venom is hemorrhagic, causing tissue damage, but does not contain neurotoxins.4 Bites from the western pygmy rattlesnake often do not lead to death, but the venom, which contains numerous proteins and enzymes, does cause necrotic hemorrhagic ulceration at the site of envenomation and possible loss of digit.5,6
We present a case of a man who was bitten on the right third digit by a western pygmy rattlesnake. We describe the clinical course and treatment.
Case Report
A 56-year-old right-handed man presented to the emergency department with a rapidly swelling, painful hand following a snakebite to the dorsal aspect of the right third digit (Figure 1). He was able to capture a photograph of the snake at the time of injury, which helped identify it as a western pygmy rattlesnake (Figure 2). He also photographed the hand immediately after the bite occurred (Figure 3). Vitals on presentation included an elevated blood pressure of 161/100 mm Hg; no fever (temperature, 36.4 °C); and normal pulse oximetry of 98%, pulse of 86 beats per minute, and respiratory rate of 16 breaths per minute.



After the snakebite, the patient’s family called the Missouri Poison Center immediately. The family identified the snake species and shared this information with the poison center. Poison control recommended calling the nearest hospitals to determine if antivenom was available and make notification of arrival.
The patient’s tetanus toxoid immunization was updated immediately upon arrival. The hand was marked to monitor swelling. Initial laboratory test results revealed the following values: sodium, 133 mmol/L (reference range, 136–145 mmol/L); potassium, 3.4 mmol/L (3.6–5.2 mmol/L); lactic acid, 2.4 mmol/L (0.5–2.2 mmol/L); creatine kinase, 425 U/L (55–170 U/L); platelet count, 68/µL (150,000–450,000/µL); fibrinogen, 169 mg/dL (185–410 mg/dL); and glucose, 121 mg/dL (74–106 mg/dL). The remainder of the complete blood cell count and metabolic panel was unremarkable. Radiographs of the hand did not show any fractures, dislocations, or foreign bodies. Missouri Poison Center was consulted. Given the patient’s severe pain, edema beyond 40 cm, and developing ecchymosis on the inner arm, the bite was graded as a 3 on the traditional snakebite severity scale. Poison control recommended 4 to 6 vials of antivenom over 60 minutes. Six vials of Crotalidae polyvalent immune fab antivenom were given.
The patient’s complete blood cell count remained unremarkable throughout his admission. His metabolic panel returned to normal at 6 hours postadmission: sodium, 139 mmol/L; potassium, 4.0 mmol/L. His lactate and creatinine kinase were not rechecked. His fibrinogen was trending upward. Serial laboratory test results revealed fibrinogen levels of 153, 158, 161, 159, 173, and 216 mg/dL at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 hours, respectively. Other laboratory test results including prothrombin time (11.0 s) and international normalized ratio (0.98) remained within reference range (11–13 s and 0.80–1.39, respectively) during serial monitoring.
The patient was hospitalized for 40 hours while waiting for his fibrinogen level to normalize. The local skin necrosis worsened acutely in this 40-hour window (Figure 4). Intravenous antibiotics were not administered during the hospital stay. Before discharge, the patient was evaluated by the surgery service, who did not recommend debridement.

Following discharge, the patient consulted a wound care expert. The area of necrosis was unroofed and debrided in the outpatient setting (Figure 5). The patient was started on oral cefalexin 500 mg twice daily for 10 days and instructed to perform twice-daily dressing changes with silver sulfadiazine cream 1%. A hand surgeon was consulted for consideration of a reverse cross-finger flap, which was not recommended. Twice-daily dressing changes for the wound—consisting of application of silver sulfadiazine cream 1% directly to the wound followed by gauze, self-adhesive soft-rolled gauze, and elastic bandages—were performed for 2 weeks.

After 2 weeks, the wound was left open to the air and cleaned with soap and water as needed. At 6 weeks, the wound was completely healed via secondary intention, except for some minor remaining ulceration at the location of the fang entry point (Figure 6). The patient had no loss of finger function or sensation.

Surgical Management of Snakebites
The surgeon’s role in managing snakebites is controversial. Snakebites were once perceived as a surgical emergency due to symptoms mimicking compartment syndrome; however, snakebites rarely cause a true compartment syndrome.7 Prophylactic bite excision and fasciotomies are not recommended. Incision and suction of the fang marks may be beneficial if performed within 15 to 30 minutes from the time of the bite.8 With access to a surgeon in this short time period being nearly impossible, incision and suctioning of fang marks generally is not recommended.9 Retained snake fangs are a possibility, and the infection could spread to a nearby joint, causing septic arthritis,10 which would be an indication for surgical intervention. Bites to the finger often cause major swelling, and the benefits of dermotomy are documented.11 Generally, early administration of antivenom will decrease local tissue reaction and prevent additional tissue loss.12 In our patient, the decision to perform dermotomy was made when the area of necrosis had declared itself and the skin reached its elastic limit. Bozkurt et al13 described the neurovascular bundles within the digit as functioning as small compartments. When the skin of the digit reaches its elastic limit, pressure within the compartment may exceed the capillary closing pressure, and the integrity of small vessels and nerves may be compromised. Our case highlights the benefit of dermotomy as well as the functional and cosmetic results that can be achieved.
Wound Care for Snakebites
There is little published on the treatment of snakebites after patients are stabilized medically for hospital discharge. Venomous snakes inject toxins that predominantly consist of enzymes (eg, phospholipase A2, phosphodiesterase, hyaluronidase, peptidase, metalloproteinase) that cause tissue destruction through diverse mechanisms.14 The venom of western pygmy rattlesnakes is hemotoxic and can cause necrotic hemorrhagic ulceration,4 as was the case in our patient.
Silver sulfadiazine commonly is used to prevent infection in burn patients. Given the large surface area of exposed dermis after debridement and concern for infection, silver sulfadiazine was chosen in our patient for local wound care treatment. Silver sulfadiazine is a widely available and low-cost drug.15 Its antibacterial effects are due to the silver ions, which only act superficially and therefore limit systemic absorption.16 Application should be performed in a clean manner with minimal trauma to the tissue. This technique is best achieved by using sterile gloves and applying the medication manually. A 0.0625-inch layer should be applied to entirely cover the cleaned debrided area.17 When performing application with tongue blades or cotton swabs, it is important to never “double dip.” Patient education on proper administration is imperative to a successful outcome.
Final Thoughts
Our case demonstrates the safe use of Crotalidae polyvalent immune fab antivenom for the treatment of western pygmy rattlesnake (S miliarius streckeri) envenomation. Early administration of antivenom following pit viper rattlesnake envenomations is important to mitigate systemic effects and the extent of soft tissue damage. There are few studies on local wound care treatment after rattlesnake envenomation. This case highlights the role of dermotomy and wound care with silver sulfadiazine cream 1%.
- Biggers B. Management of Missouri snake bites. Mo Med. 2017;114:254-257.
- Stamm R. Sistrurus miliarius pigmy rattlesnake. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology. Accessed September 23, 2024. https://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Sistrurus_miliarius/
- Missouri Department of Conservation. Western pygmy rattlesnake. Accessed September 18, 2024. https://mdc.mo.gov/discover-nature/field-guide/western-pygmy-rattlesnake
- AnimalSake. Facts about the pigmy rattlesnake that are sure to surprise you. Accessed September 18, 2024. https://animalsake.com/pygmy-rattlesnake
- King AM, Crim WS, Menke NB, et al. Pygmy rattlesnake envenomation treated with crotalidae polyvalent immune fab antivenom. Toxicon. 2012;60:1287-1289.
- Juckett G, Hancox JG. Venomous snakebites in the United States: management review and update. Am Fam Physician. 2002;65:1367-1375.
- Toschlog EA, Bauer CR, Hall EL, et al. Surgical considerations in the management of pit viper snake envenomation. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217:726-735.
- Cribari C. Management of poisonous snakebite. American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma; 2004. https://www.hartcountyga.gov/documents/PoisonousSnakebiteTreatment.pdf
- Walker JP, Morrison RL. Current management of copperhead snakebite. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212:470-474.
- Gelman D, Bates T, Nuelle JAV. Septic arthritis of the proximal interphalangeal joint after rattlesnake bite. J Hand Surg Am. 2022;47:484.e1-484.e4.
- Watt CH Jr. Treatment of poisonous snakebite with emphasis on digit dermotomy. South Med J. 1985;78:694-699.
- Corneille MG, Larson S, Stewart RM, et al. A large single-center experience with treatment of patients with crotalid envenomations: outcomes with and evolution of antivenin therapy. Am J Surg. 2006;192:848-852.
- Bozkurt M, Kulahci Y, Zor F, et al. The management of pit viper envenomation of the hand. Hand (NY). 2008;3:324-331.
- Aziz H, Rhee P, Pandit V, et al. The current concepts in management of animal (dog, cat, snake, scorpion) and human bite wounds. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015;78:641-648.
- Hummel RP, MacMillan BG, Altemeier WA. Topical and systemic antibacterial agents in the treatment of burns. Ann Surg. 1970;172:370-384.
- Modak SM, Sampath L, Fox CL. Combined topical use of silver sulfadiazine and antibiotics as a possible solution to bacterial resistance in burn wounds. J Burn Care Rehabil. 1988;9:359-363.
- Oaks RJ, Cindass R. Silver sulfadiazine. StatPearls [Internet]. Updated January 22, 2023. Accessed September 23, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK556054/
There are 375 species of poisonous snakes, with approximately 20,000 deaths worldwide each year due to snakebites, mostly in Asia and Africa.1 The death rate in the United States is 14 to 20 cases per year. In the United States, a variety of rattlesnakes are poisonous. There are 2 genera of rattlesnakes: Sistrurus (3 species) and Crotalus (23 species). The pygmy rattlesnake belongs to the Sistrurus miliarius species that is divided into 3 subspecies: the Carolina pigmy rattlesnake (S miliarius miliarius), the western pygmy rattlesnake (S miliarius streckeri), and the dusky pygmy rattlesnake (S miliarius barbouri).2
The western pygmy rattlesnake belongs to the Crotalidae family. The rattlesnakes in this family also are known as pit vipers. All pit vipers have common characteristics for identification: triangular head, fangs, elliptical pupils, and a heat-sensing pit between the eyes. The western pygmy rattlesnake is found in Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kentucky, and Tennessee.1 It is small bodied (15–20 inches)3 and grayish-brown, with a brown dorsal stripe with black blotches on its back. It is found in glades, second-growth forests near rock ledges, and areas where powerlines cut through dense forest.3 Its venom is hemorrhagic, causing tissue damage, but does not contain neurotoxins.4 Bites from the western pygmy rattlesnake often do not lead to death, but the venom, which contains numerous proteins and enzymes, does cause necrotic hemorrhagic ulceration at the site of envenomation and possible loss of digit.5,6
We present a case of a man who was bitten on the right third digit by a western pygmy rattlesnake. We describe the clinical course and treatment.
Case Report
A 56-year-old right-handed man presented to the emergency department with a rapidly swelling, painful hand following a snakebite to the dorsal aspect of the right third digit (Figure 1). He was able to capture a photograph of the snake at the time of injury, which helped identify it as a western pygmy rattlesnake (Figure 2). He also photographed the hand immediately after the bite occurred (Figure 3). Vitals on presentation included an elevated blood pressure of 161/100 mm Hg; no fever (temperature, 36.4 °C); and normal pulse oximetry of 98%, pulse of 86 beats per minute, and respiratory rate of 16 breaths per minute.



After the snakebite, the patient’s family called the Missouri Poison Center immediately. The family identified the snake species and shared this information with the poison center. Poison control recommended calling the nearest hospitals to determine if antivenom was available and make notification of arrival.
The patient’s tetanus toxoid immunization was updated immediately upon arrival. The hand was marked to monitor swelling. Initial laboratory test results revealed the following values: sodium, 133 mmol/L (reference range, 136–145 mmol/L); potassium, 3.4 mmol/L (3.6–5.2 mmol/L); lactic acid, 2.4 mmol/L (0.5–2.2 mmol/L); creatine kinase, 425 U/L (55–170 U/L); platelet count, 68/µL (150,000–450,000/µL); fibrinogen, 169 mg/dL (185–410 mg/dL); and glucose, 121 mg/dL (74–106 mg/dL). The remainder of the complete blood cell count and metabolic panel was unremarkable. Radiographs of the hand did not show any fractures, dislocations, or foreign bodies. Missouri Poison Center was consulted. Given the patient’s severe pain, edema beyond 40 cm, and developing ecchymosis on the inner arm, the bite was graded as a 3 on the traditional snakebite severity scale. Poison control recommended 4 to 6 vials of antivenom over 60 minutes. Six vials of Crotalidae polyvalent immune fab antivenom were given.
The patient’s complete blood cell count remained unremarkable throughout his admission. His metabolic panel returned to normal at 6 hours postadmission: sodium, 139 mmol/L; potassium, 4.0 mmol/L. His lactate and creatinine kinase were not rechecked. His fibrinogen was trending upward. Serial laboratory test results revealed fibrinogen levels of 153, 158, 161, 159, 173, and 216 mg/dL at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 hours, respectively. Other laboratory test results including prothrombin time (11.0 s) and international normalized ratio (0.98) remained within reference range (11–13 s and 0.80–1.39, respectively) during serial monitoring.
The patient was hospitalized for 40 hours while waiting for his fibrinogen level to normalize. The local skin necrosis worsened acutely in this 40-hour window (Figure 4). Intravenous antibiotics were not administered during the hospital stay. Before discharge, the patient was evaluated by the surgery service, who did not recommend debridement.

Following discharge, the patient consulted a wound care expert. The area of necrosis was unroofed and debrided in the outpatient setting (Figure 5). The patient was started on oral cefalexin 500 mg twice daily for 10 days and instructed to perform twice-daily dressing changes with silver sulfadiazine cream 1%. A hand surgeon was consulted for consideration of a reverse cross-finger flap, which was not recommended. Twice-daily dressing changes for the wound—consisting of application of silver sulfadiazine cream 1% directly to the wound followed by gauze, self-adhesive soft-rolled gauze, and elastic bandages—were performed for 2 weeks.

After 2 weeks, the wound was left open to the air and cleaned with soap and water as needed. At 6 weeks, the wound was completely healed via secondary intention, except for some minor remaining ulceration at the location of the fang entry point (Figure 6). The patient had no loss of finger function or sensation.

Surgical Management of Snakebites
The surgeon’s role in managing snakebites is controversial. Snakebites were once perceived as a surgical emergency due to symptoms mimicking compartment syndrome; however, snakebites rarely cause a true compartment syndrome.7 Prophylactic bite excision and fasciotomies are not recommended. Incision and suction of the fang marks may be beneficial if performed within 15 to 30 minutes from the time of the bite.8 With access to a surgeon in this short time period being nearly impossible, incision and suctioning of fang marks generally is not recommended.9 Retained snake fangs are a possibility, and the infection could spread to a nearby joint, causing septic arthritis,10 which would be an indication for surgical intervention. Bites to the finger often cause major swelling, and the benefits of dermotomy are documented.11 Generally, early administration of antivenom will decrease local tissue reaction and prevent additional tissue loss.12 In our patient, the decision to perform dermotomy was made when the area of necrosis had declared itself and the skin reached its elastic limit. Bozkurt et al13 described the neurovascular bundles within the digit as functioning as small compartments. When the skin of the digit reaches its elastic limit, pressure within the compartment may exceed the capillary closing pressure, and the integrity of small vessels and nerves may be compromised. Our case highlights the benefit of dermotomy as well as the functional and cosmetic results that can be achieved.
Wound Care for Snakebites
There is little published on the treatment of snakebites after patients are stabilized medically for hospital discharge. Venomous snakes inject toxins that predominantly consist of enzymes (eg, phospholipase A2, phosphodiesterase, hyaluronidase, peptidase, metalloproteinase) that cause tissue destruction through diverse mechanisms.14 The venom of western pygmy rattlesnakes is hemotoxic and can cause necrotic hemorrhagic ulceration,4 as was the case in our patient.
Silver sulfadiazine commonly is used to prevent infection in burn patients. Given the large surface area of exposed dermis after debridement and concern for infection, silver sulfadiazine was chosen in our patient for local wound care treatment. Silver sulfadiazine is a widely available and low-cost drug.15 Its antibacterial effects are due to the silver ions, which only act superficially and therefore limit systemic absorption.16 Application should be performed in a clean manner with minimal trauma to the tissue. This technique is best achieved by using sterile gloves and applying the medication manually. A 0.0625-inch layer should be applied to entirely cover the cleaned debrided area.17 When performing application with tongue blades or cotton swabs, it is important to never “double dip.” Patient education on proper administration is imperative to a successful outcome.
Final Thoughts
Our case demonstrates the safe use of Crotalidae polyvalent immune fab antivenom for the treatment of western pygmy rattlesnake (S miliarius streckeri) envenomation. Early administration of antivenom following pit viper rattlesnake envenomations is important to mitigate systemic effects and the extent of soft tissue damage. There are few studies on local wound care treatment after rattlesnake envenomation. This case highlights the role of dermotomy and wound care with silver sulfadiazine cream 1%.
There are 375 species of poisonous snakes, with approximately 20,000 deaths worldwide each year due to snakebites, mostly in Asia and Africa.1 The death rate in the United States is 14 to 20 cases per year. In the United States, a variety of rattlesnakes are poisonous. There are 2 genera of rattlesnakes: Sistrurus (3 species) and Crotalus (23 species). The pygmy rattlesnake belongs to the Sistrurus miliarius species that is divided into 3 subspecies: the Carolina pigmy rattlesnake (S miliarius miliarius), the western pygmy rattlesnake (S miliarius streckeri), and the dusky pygmy rattlesnake (S miliarius barbouri).2
The western pygmy rattlesnake belongs to the Crotalidae family. The rattlesnakes in this family also are known as pit vipers. All pit vipers have common characteristics for identification: triangular head, fangs, elliptical pupils, and a heat-sensing pit between the eyes. The western pygmy rattlesnake is found in Missouri, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Kentucky, and Tennessee.1 It is small bodied (15–20 inches)3 and grayish-brown, with a brown dorsal stripe with black blotches on its back. It is found in glades, second-growth forests near rock ledges, and areas where powerlines cut through dense forest.3 Its venom is hemorrhagic, causing tissue damage, but does not contain neurotoxins.4 Bites from the western pygmy rattlesnake often do not lead to death, but the venom, which contains numerous proteins and enzymes, does cause necrotic hemorrhagic ulceration at the site of envenomation and possible loss of digit.5,6
We present a case of a man who was bitten on the right third digit by a western pygmy rattlesnake. We describe the clinical course and treatment.
Case Report
A 56-year-old right-handed man presented to the emergency department with a rapidly swelling, painful hand following a snakebite to the dorsal aspect of the right third digit (Figure 1). He was able to capture a photograph of the snake at the time of injury, which helped identify it as a western pygmy rattlesnake (Figure 2). He also photographed the hand immediately after the bite occurred (Figure 3). Vitals on presentation included an elevated blood pressure of 161/100 mm Hg; no fever (temperature, 36.4 °C); and normal pulse oximetry of 98%, pulse of 86 beats per minute, and respiratory rate of 16 breaths per minute.



After the snakebite, the patient’s family called the Missouri Poison Center immediately. The family identified the snake species and shared this information with the poison center. Poison control recommended calling the nearest hospitals to determine if antivenom was available and make notification of arrival.
The patient’s tetanus toxoid immunization was updated immediately upon arrival. The hand was marked to monitor swelling. Initial laboratory test results revealed the following values: sodium, 133 mmol/L (reference range, 136–145 mmol/L); potassium, 3.4 mmol/L (3.6–5.2 mmol/L); lactic acid, 2.4 mmol/L (0.5–2.2 mmol/L); creatine kinase, 425 U/L (55–170 U/L); platelet count, 68/µL (150,000–450,000/µL); fibrinogen, 169 mg/dL (185–410 mg/dL); and glucose, 121 mg/dL (74–106 mg/dL). The remainder of the complete blood cell count and metabolic panel was unremarkable. Radiographs of the hand did not show any fractures, dislocations, or foreign bodies. Missouri Poison Center was consulted. Given the patient’s severe pain, edema beyond 40 cm, and developing ecchymosis on the inner arm, the bite was graded as a 3 on the traditional snakebite severity scale. Poison control recommended 4 to 6 vials of antivenom over 60 minutes. Six vials of Crotalidae polyvalent immune fab antivenom were given.
The patient’s complete blood cell count remained unremarkable throughout his admission. His metabolic panel returned to normal at 6 hours postadmission: sodium, 139 mmol/L; potassium, 4.0 mmol/L. His lactate and creatinine kinase were not rechecked. His fibrinogen was trending upward. Serial laboratory test results revealed fibrinogen levels of 153, 158, 161, 159, 173, and 216 mg/dL at 6, 12, 18, 24, 30, and 36 hours, respectively. Other laboratory test results including prothrombin time (11.0 s) and international normalized ratio (0.98) remained within reference range (11–13 s and 0.80–1.39, respectively) during serial monitoring.
The patient was hospitalized for 40 hours while waiting for his fibrinogen level to normalize. The local skin necrosis worsened acutely in this 40-hour window (Figure 4). Intravenous antibiotics were not administered during the hospital stay. Before discharge, the patient was evaluated by the surgery service, who did not recommend debridement.

Following discharge, the patient consulted a wound care expert. The area of necrosis was unroofed and debrided in the outpatient setting (Figure 5). The patient was started on oral cefalexin 500 mg twice daily for 10 days and instructed to perform twice-daily dressing changes with silver sulfadiazine cream 1%. A hand surgeon was consulted for consideration of a reverse cross-finger flap, which was not recommended. Twice-daily dressing changes for the wound—consisting of application of silver sulfadiazine cream 1% directly to the wound followed by gauze, self-adhesive soft-rolled gauze, and elastic bandages—were performed for 2 weeks.

After 2 weeks, the wound was left open to the air and cleaned with soap and water as needed. At 6 weeks, the wound was completely healed via secondary intention, except for some minor remaining ulceration at the location of the fang entry point (Figure 6). The patient had no loss of finger function or sensation.

Surgical Management of Snakebites
The surgeon’s role in managing snakebites is controversial. Snakebites were once perceived as a surgical emergency due to symptoms mimicking compartment syndrome; however, snakebites rarely cause a true compartment syndrome.7 Prophylactic bite excision and fasciotomies are not recommended. Incision and suction of the fang marks may be beneficial if performed within 15 to 30 minutes from the time of the bite.8 With access to a surgeon in this short time period being nearly impossible, incision and suctioning of fang marks generally is not recommended.9 Retained snake fangs are a possibility, and the infection could spread to a nearby joint, causing septic arthritis,10 which would be an indication for surgical intervention. Bites to the finger often cause major swelling, and the benefits of dermotomy are documented.11 Generally, early administration of antivenom will decrease local tissue reaction and prevent additional tissue loss.12 In our patient, the decision to perform dermotomy was made when the area of necrosis had declared itself and the skin reached its elastic limit. Bozkurt et al13 described the neurovascular bundles within the digit as functioning as small compartments. When the skin of the digit reaches its elastic limit, pressure within the compartment may exceed the capillary closing pressure, and the integrity of small vessels and nerves may be compromised. Our case highlights the benefit of dermotomy as well as the functional and cosmetic results that can be achieved.
Wound Care for Snakebites
There is little published on the treatment of snakebites after patients are stabilized medically for hospital discharge. Venomous snakes inject toxins that predominantly consist of enzymes (eg, phospholipase A2, phosphodiesterase, hyaluronidase, peptidase, metalloproteinase) that cause tissue destruction through diverse mechanisms.14 The venom of western pygmy rattlesnakes is hemotoxic and can cause necrotic hemorrhagic ulceration,4 as was the case in our patient.
Silver sulfadiazine commonly is used to prevent infection in burn patients. Given the large surface area of exposed dermis after debridement and concern for infection, silver sulfadiazine was chosen in our patient for local wound care treatment. Silver sulfadiazine is a widely available and low-cost drug.15 Its antibacterial effects are due to the silver ions, which only act superficially and therefore limit systemic absorption.16 Application should be performed in a clean manner with minimal trauma to the tissue. This technique is best achieved by using sterile gloves and applying the medication manually. A 0.0625-inch layer should be applied to entirely cover the cleaned debrided area.17 When performing application with tongue blades or cotton swabs, it is important to never “double dip.” Patient education on proper administration is imperative to a successful outcome.
Final Thoughts
Our case demonstrates the safe use of Crotalidae polyvalent immune fab antivenom for the treatment of western pygmy rattlesnake (S miliarius streckeri) envenomation. Early administration of antivenom following pit viper rattlesnake envenomations is important to mitigate systemic effects and the extent of soft tissue damage. There are few studies on local wound care treatment after rattlesnake envenomation. This case highlights the role of dermotomy and wound care with silver sulfadiazine cream 1%.
- Biggers B. Management of Missouri snake bites. Mo Med. 2017;114:254-257.
- Stamm R. Sistrurus miliarius pigmy rattlesnake. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology. Accessed September 23, 2024. https://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Sistrurus_miliarius/
- Missouri Department of Conservation. Western pygmy rattlesnake. Accessed September 18, 2024. https://mdc.mo.gov/discover-nature/field-guide/western-pygmy-rattlesnake
- AnimalSake. Facts about the pigmy rattlesnake that are sure to surprise you. Accessed September 18, 2024. https://animalsake.com/pygmy-rattlesnake
- King AM, Crim WS, Menke NB, et al. Pygmy rattlesnake envenomation treated with crotalidae polyvalent immune fab antivenom. Toxicon. 2012;60:1287-1289.
- Juckett G, Hancox JG. Venomous snakebites in the United States: management review and update. Am Fam Physician. 2002;65:1367-1375.
- Toschlog EA, Bauer CR, Hall EL, et al. Surgical considerations in the management of pit viper snake envenomation. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217:726-735.
- Cribari C. Management of poisonous snakebite. American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma; 2004. https://www.hartcountyga.gov/documents/PoisonousSnakebiteTreatment.pdf
- Walker JP, Morrison RL. Current management of copperhead snakebite. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212:470-474.
- Gelman D, Bates T, Nuelle JAV. Septic arthritis of the proximal interphalangeal joint after rattlesnake bite. J Hand Surg Am. 2022;47:484.e1-484.e4.
- Watt CH Jr. Treatment of poisonous snakebite with emphasis on digit dermotomy. South Med J. 1985;78:694-699.
- Corneille MG, Larson S, Stewart RM, et al. A large single-center experience with treatment of patients with crotalid envenomations: outcomes with and evolution of antivenin therapy. Am J Surg. 2006;192:848-852.
- Bozkurt M, Kulahci Y, Zor F, et al. The management of pit viper envenomation of the hand. Hand (NY). 2008;3:324-331.
- Aziz H, Rhee P, Pandit V, et al. The current concepts in management of animal (dog, cat, snake, scorpion) and human bite wounds. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015;78:641-648.
- Hummel RP, MacMillan BG, Altemeier WA. Topical and systemic antibacterial agents in the treatment of burns. Ann Surg. 1970;172:370-384.
- Modak SM, Sampath L, Fox CL. Combined topical use of silver sulfadiazine and antibiotics as a possible solution to bacterial resistance in burn wounds. J Burn Care Rehabil. 1988;9:359-363.
- Oaks RJ, Cindass R. Silver sulfadiazine. StatPearls [Internet]. Updated January 22, 2023. Accessed September 23, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK556054/
- Biggers B. Management of Missouri snake bites. Mo Med. 2017;114:254-257.
- Stamm R. Sistrurus miliarius pigmy rattlesnake. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology. Accessed September 23, 2024. https://animaldiversity.org/accounts/Sistrurus_miliarius/
- Missouri Department of Conservation. Western pygmy rattlesnake. Accessed September 18, 2024. https://mdc.mo.gov/discover-nature/field-guide/western-pygmy-rattlesnake
- AnimalSake. Facts about the pigmy rattlesnake that are sure to surprise you. Accessed September 18, 2024. https://animalsake.com/pygmy-rattlesnake
- King AM, Crim WS, Menke NB, et al. Pygmy rattlesnake envenomation treated with crotalidae polyvalent immune fab antivenom. Toxicon. 2012;60:1287-1289.
- Juckett G, Hancox JG. Venomous snakebites in the United States: management review and update. Am Fam Physician. 2002;65:1367-1375.
- Toschlog EA, Bauer CR, Hall EL, et al. Surgical considerations in the management of pit viper snake envenomation. J Am Coll Surg. 2013;217:726-735.
- Cribari C. Management of poisonous snakebite. American College of Surgeons Committee on Trauma; 2004. https://www.hartcountyga.gov/documents/PoisonousSnakebiteTreatment.pdf
- Walker JP, Morrison RL. Current management of copperhead snakebite. J Am Coll Surg. 2011;212:470-474.
- Gelman D, Bates T, Nuelle JAV. Septic arthritis of the proximal interphalangeal joint after rattlesnake bite. J Hand Surg Am. 2022;47:484.e1-484.e4.
- Watt CH Jr. Treatment of poisonous snakebite with emphasis on digit dermotomy. South Med J. 1985;78:694-699.
- Corneille MG, Larson S, Stewart RM, et al. A large single-center experience with treatment of patients with crotalid envenomations: outcomes with and evolution of antivenin therapy. Am J Surg. 2006;192:848-852.
- Bozkurt M, Kulahci Y, Zor F, et al. The management of pit viper envenomation of the hand. Hand (NY). 2008;3:324-331.
- Aziz H, Rhee P, Pandit V, et al. The current concepts in management of animal (dog, cat, snake, scorpion) and human bite wounds. J Trauma Acute Care Surg. 2015;78:641-648.
- Hummel RP, MacMillan BG, Altemeier WA. Topical and systemic antibacterial agents in the treatment of burns. Ann Surg. 1970;172:370-384.
- Modak SM, Sampath L, Fox CL. Combined topical use of silver sulfadiazine and antibiotics as a possible solution to bacterial resistance in burn wounds. J Burn Care Rehabil. 1988;9:359-363.
- Oaks RJ, Cindass R. Silver sulfadiazine. StatPearls [Internet]. Updated January 22, 2023. Accessed September 23, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK556054/
Practice Points
- Patients should seek medical attention immediately for western pygmy rattlesnake bites for early initiation of antivenom treatment.
- Contact the closest emergency department to confirm they are equipped to treat rattlesnake bites and notify them of a pending arrival.
- Consider dermotomy or local debridement of bites involving the digits.
- Monitor the wound in the days and weeks following the bite to ensure adequate healing.
Reflectance Confocal Microscopy as a Diagnostic Aid in Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Mango Sap
The mango tree (Mangifera indica) produces nutrient-dense fruit—known colloquially as the “king of fruits”—that is widely consumed across the world. Native to southern Asia, the mango tree is a member of the Anacardiaceae family, a large family of flowering, fruit-bearing plants.1 Many members of the Anacardiaceae family, which includes poison ivy and poison oak, are known to produce urushiol, a skin irritant associated with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD).2 Interestingly, despite its widespread consumption and categorization in the Anacardiaceae family, allergic reactions to mango are comparatively rare; they occur as either immediate type I hypersensitivity reactions manifesting with rapid-onset symptoms such as urticaria, wheezing, and angioedema, or delayed type IV hypersensitivity reactions manifesting as ACD.3 Although exposure to components of the mango tree has been most characteristically linked to type IV hypersensitivity reactions, there remain fewer than 40 reported cases of mango-induced ACD since it was first described in 1939.4
Evaluation of ACD most commonly includes a thorough clinical assessment with diagnostic support from patch testing and histopathologic review following skin biopsy. In recent years, reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) has shown promising potential to join the repertoire of diagnostic tools for ACD by enabling dynamic and high-resolution imaging of contact dermatitis in vivo.5-10 Reflectance confocal microscopy is a noninvasive optical imaging technique that uses a low-energy diode laser to penetrate the layers of the skin. The resulting reflected light generates images that facilitate visualization of cutaneous structures to the depth of the papillary dermis.11 While it is most commonly used in skin cancer diagnostics, preliminary studies also have shown an emerging role for RCM in the evaluation of eczematous and inflammatory skin disease, including contact dermatitis.5-10 Herein, we present a unique case of mango sap–induced ACD imaged and diagnosed in real time via RCM.
Case Report
A 39-year-old woman presented to our clinic with a pruritic vesicular eruption on the right leg of 2 weeks’ duration that initially had developed within 7 days of exposure to mango tree sap (Figure 1). The patient reported having experienced similar pruritic eruptions in the past following contact with mango sap while eating mangos but denied any history of reactions from ingestion of the fruit. She also reported a history of robust reactions to poison ivy; however, a timeline specifying the order of first exposure to these irritants was unknown. She denied any personal or family history of atopic conditions.

The affected skin was imaged in real time during clinic using RCM, which showed an inflammatory infiltrate represented by dark spongiotic vesicles containing bright cells (Figure 2). Additional RCM imaging at the level of the stratum spinosum showed dark spongiotic areas with bright inflammatory cells infiltrating the vesicles, which were surrounded by normal skin showing a typical epidermal honeycomb pattern (Figure 3). These findings were diagnostic of ACD secondary to exposure to mango sap. The patient was advised to apply clobetasol cream 0.05% to the affected area. Notable improvement of the rash was noted within 10 days of treatment.


Comment
Exposure to the mango tree and its fruit is a rare cause of ACD, with few reported cases in the literature. The majority of known instances have occurred in non–mango-cultivating countries, largely the United States, although cases also have been reported in Canada, Australia, France, Japan, and Thailand.3,12 Mango-induced contact allergy follows a roughly equal distribution between males and females and most often occurs in young adults during the third and fourth decades of life.4,12-21 Importantly, delayed-type hypersensitivity reactions to mango can manifest as either localized or systemic ACD. Localized ACD can be induced via direct contact with the mango tree and its components or ingestion of the fruit.3,12,22 Conversely, systemic ACD is primarily stimulated by ingestion of the fruit. In our case, the patient had no history of allergy following mango ingestion, and her ACD was prompted by isolated contact with mango sap. The time from exposure to symptom onset of known instances of mango ACD varies widely, ranging from less than 24 hours to as long as 9 days.3,12 Diagnosis of mango-induced ACD largely is guided by clinical findings. Presenting symptoms often include an eczematous, vesicular, pruritic rash on affected areas of the skin, frequently the head, neck, and extremities. Patients also commonly present with linear papulovesicular lesions and periorbital or perioral edema.
The suspected allergens responsible for mango-induced ACD are derived from resorcinol—specifically heptadecadienyl resorcinol, heptadecenyl resorcinol, and pentadecyl resorcinol, which are collectively known as mango allergens.23 These allergens can be found within the pulp and skin of the mango fruit as well as in the bark and leaves of the mango tree, which may explain observed allergic reactions to components of both the mango fruit and tree.12 Similar to these resorcinol derivatives, the urushiol resin found in poison ivy and poison oak is a catechol derivative.2 Importantly, both resorcinols and catechols are isomers of the same aromatic phenol—dihydroxybenzene. Because of these similarities, it is thought that the allergens in mangos may cross-react with urushiol in poison ivy or poison oak.23 Alongside their shared categorization in the Anacardiaceae family, it is hypothesized that this cross-reactivity underlies the sensitization that has been noted between mango and poison ivy or poison oak exposure.12,23,24 Thus, ACD often can occur on initial contact with the mango tree or its components, as a prior exposure to poison ivy or poison oak may serve as the inciting factor for hypersensitization. The majority of reported cases in the literature also occurred in countries where exposure to poison ivy and poison oak are common, further supporting the notion that these compounds may provide a sensitizing trigger for a future mango contact allergy.12
A detailed clinical history combined with adjunctive diagnostic support from patch testing and histopathology of biopsied skin lesions classically are used in the diagnosis of mango-induced ACD. Due to its ability to provide quick and noninvasive in vivo imaging of cutaneous lesions, RCM's applications have expanded to include evaluation of inflammatory skin diseases such as contact dermatitis. Many features of contact dermatitis identified via RCM are common between ACD and irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) and include disruption of the stratum corneum, parakeratosis, vesiculation, spongiosis, and exocytosis.6,10,25 Studies also have described features shown via RCM that are unique to ACD, including vasodilation and intercellular edema, compared to more distinct targetoid keratinocytes and detached corneocytes seen in ICD.6,10,25 Studies by Astner et al5,6 demonstrated a wide range of sensitivity from 52% to 96% and a high specificity of RCM greater than 95% for many of the aforementioned features of contact dermatitis, including disruption of the stratum corneum, parakeratosis, spongiosis, and exocytosis. Additional studies have further strengthened these findings, demonstrating sensitivity and specificity values of 83% and 92% for contact dermatitis under RCM, respectively.26 Importantly, given the similarities and potentially large overlap of features between ACD and ICD identified via RCM as well as findings seen on physical examination and histopathology, an emphasis on clinical correlation is essential when differentiating between these 2 variants of contact dermatitis. Thus, taken in consideration with clinical contexts, RCM has shown potent diagnostic accuracy and great potential to support the evaluation of ACD alongside patch testing and histopathology.
Final Thoughts
Contact allergy to the mango tree and its components is uncommon. We report a unique case of mango sap–induced ACD evaluated and diagnosed via dynamic visualization under RCM. As a noninvasive and reproducible imaging technique with resolutions comparable to histopathologic analysis, RCM is a promising tool that can be used to support the diagnostic evaluation of ACD.
- Shah KA, Patel MB, Patel RJ, et al. Mangifera indica (mango). Pharmacogn Rev. 2010;4:42-48.
- Lofgran T, Mahabal GD. Toxicodendron toxicity. StatPearls [Internet]. Updated May 16, 2023. Accessed September 19, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK557866
- Sareen R, Shah A. Hypersensitivity manifestations to the fruit mango. Asia Pac Allergy. 2011;1:43-49.
- Zakon SJ. Contact dermatitis due to mango. JAMA. 1939;113:1808.
- Astner S, Gonzalez E, Cheung A, et al. Pilot study on the sensitivity and specificity of in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy in the diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2005;53:986-992.
- Astner S, Gonzalez S, Gonzalez E. Noninvasive evaluation of allergic and irritant contact dermatitis by in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy. Dermatitis. 2006;17:182-191.
- Csuka EA, Ward SC, Ekelem C, et al. Reflectance confocal microscopy, optical coherence tomography, and multiphoton microscopy in inflammatory skin disease diagnosis. Lasers Surg Med. 2021;53:776-797.
- Guichard A, Fanian F, Girardin P, et al. Allergic patch test and contact dermatitis by in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy [in French]. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2014;141:805-807.
- Sakanashi EN, Matsumura M, Kikuchi K, et al. A comparative study of allergic contact dermatitis by patch test versus reflectance confocal laser microscopy, with nickel and cobalt. Eur J Dermatol. 2010;20:705-711.
- Swindells K, Burnett N, Rius-Diaz F, et al. Reflectance confocal microscopy may differentiate acute allergic and irritant contact dermatitis in vivo. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004;50:220-228.
- Shahriari N, Grant-Kels JM, Rabinovitz H, et al. Reflectance confocal microscopy: principles, basic terminology, clinical indications, limitations, and practical considerations. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84:1-14.
- Berghea EC, Craiu M, Ali S, et al. Contact allergy induced by mango (Mangifera indica): a relevant topic? Medicina (Kaunas). 2021;57:1240.
- O’Hern K, Zhang F, Zug KA, et al. “Mango slice” dermatitis: pediatric allergic contact dermatitis to mango pulp and skin. Dermatitis. 2022;33:E46-E47.
- Raison-Peyron N, Aljaber F, Al Ali OA, et al. Mango dermatitis: an unusual cause of eyelid dermatitis in France. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:599-600.
- Alipour Tehrany Y, Coulombe J. Mango allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:241-242.
- Yoo MJ, Carius BM. Mango dermatitis after urushiol sensitization. Clin Pract Cases Emerg Med. 2019;3:361-363.
- Miyazawa H, Nishie W, Hata H, et al. A severe case of mango dermatitis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2018;32:E160-E161.
- Trehan I, Meuli GJ. Mango contact allergy. J Travel Med. 2010;17:284.
- Wiwanitkit V. Mango dermatitis. Indian J Dermatol. 2008;53:158.
- Weinstein S, Bassiri-Tehrani S, Cohen DE. Allergic contact dermatitis to mango flesh. Int J Dermatol. 2004;43:195-196.
- Calvert ML, Robertson I, Samaratunga H. Mango dermatitis: allergic contact dermatitis to Mangifera indica. Australas J Dermatol. 1996;37:59-60.
- Thoo CH, Freeman S. Hypersensitivity reaction to the ingestion of mango flesh. Australas J Dermatol. 2008;49:116-119.
- Oka K, Saito F, Yasuhara T, et al. A study of cross-reactions between mango contact allergens and urushiol. Contact Dermatitis. 2004;51:292-296.
- Keil H, Wasserman D, Dawson CR. Mango dermatitis and its relationship to poison ivy hypersensitivity. Ann Allergy. 1946;4: 268-281.
- Maarouf M, Costello CM, Gonzalez S, et al. In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy: emerging role in noninvasive diagnosis and monitoring of eczematous dermatoses. Actas Dermosifiliogr (Engl Ed). 2019;110:626-636.
- Koller S, Gerger A, Ahlgrimm-Siess V, et al. In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy of erythematosquamous skin diseases. Exp Dermatol. 2009;18:536-540.
The mango tree (Mangifera indica) produces nutrient-dense fruit—known colloquially as the “king of fruits”—that is widely consumed across the world. Native to southern Asia, the mango tree is a member of the Anacardiaceae family, a large family of flowering, fruit-bearing plants.1 Many members of the Anacardiaceae family, which includes poison ivy and poison oak, are known to produce urushiol, a skin irritant associated with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD).2 Interestingly, despite its widespread consumption and categorization in the Anacardiaceae family, allergic reactions to mango are comparatively rare; they occur as either immediate type I hypersensitivity reactions manifesting with rapid-onset symptoms such as urticaria, wheezing, and angioedema, or delayed type IV hypersensitivity reactions manifesting as ACD.3 Although exposure to components of the mango tree has been most characteristically linked to type IV hypersensitivity reactions, there remain fewer than 40 reported cases of mango-induced ACD since it was first described in 1939.4
Evaluation of ACD most commonly includes a thorough clinical assessment with diagnostic support from patch testing and histopathologic review following skin biopsy. In recent years, reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) has shown promising potential to join the repertoire of diagnostic tools for ACD by enabling dynamic and high-resolution imaging of contact dermatitis in vivo.5-10 Reflectance confocal microscopy is a noninvasive optical imaging technique that uses a low-energy diode laser to penetrate the layers of the skin. The resulting reflected light generates images that facilitate visualization of cutaneous structures to the depth of the papillary dermis.11 While it is most commonly used in skin cancer diagnostics, preliminary studies also have shown an emerging role for RCM in the evaluation of eczematous and inflammatory skin disease, including contact dermatitis.5-10 Herein, we present a unique case of mango sap–induced ACD imaged and diagnosed in real time via RCM.
Case Report
A 39-year-old woman presented to our clinic with a pruritic vesicular eruption on the right leg of 2 weeks’ duration that initially had developed within 7 days of exposure to mango tree sap (Figure 1). The patient reported having experienced similar pruritic eruptions in the past following contact with mango sap while eating mangos but denied any history of reactions from ingestion of the fruit. She also reported a history of robust reactions to poison ivy; however, a timeline specifying the order of first exposure to these irritants was unknown. She denied any personal or family history of atopic conditions.

The affected skin was imaged in real time during clinic using RCM, which showed an inflammatory infiltrate represented by dark spongiotic vesicles containing bright cells (Figure 2). Additional RCM imaging at the level of the stratum spinosum showed dark spongiotic areas with bright inflammatory cells infiltrating the vesicles, which were surrounded by normal skin showing a typical epidermal honeycomb pattern (Figure 3). These findings were diagnostic of ACD secondary to exposure to mango sap. The patient was advised to apply clobetasol cream 0.05% to the affected area. Notable improvement of the rash was noted within 10 days of treatment.


Comment
Exposure to the mango tree and its fruit is a rare cause of ACD, with few reported cases in the literature. The majority of known instances have occurred in non–mango-cultivating countries, largely the United States, although cases also have been reported in Canada, Australia, France, Japan, and Thailand.3,12 Mango-induced contact allergy follows a roughly equal distribution between males and females and most often occurs in young adults during the third and fourth decades of life.4,12-21 Importantly, delayed-type hypersensitivity reactions to mango can manifest as either localized or systemic ACD. Localized ACD can be induced via direct contact with the mango tree and its components or ingestion of the fruit.3,12,22 Conversely, systemic ACD is primarily stimulated by ingestion of the fruit. In our case, the patient had no history of allergy following mango ingestion, and her ACD was prompted by isolated contact with mango sap. The time from exposure to symptom onset of known instances of mango ACD varies widely, ranging from less than 24 hours to as long as 9 days.3,12 Diagnosis of mango-induced ACD largely is guided by clinical findings. Presenting symptoms often include an eczematous, vesicular, pruritic rash on affected areas of the skin, frequently the head, neck, and extremities. Patients also commonly present with linear papulovesicular lesions and periorbital or perioral edema.
The suspected allergens responsible for mango-induced ACD are derived from resorcinol—specifically heptadecadienyl resorcinol, heptadecenyl resorcinol, and pentadecyl resorcinol, which are collectively known as mango allergens.23 These allergens can be found within the pulp and skin of the mango fruit as well as in the bark and leaves of the mango tree, which may explain observed allergic reactions to components of both the mango fruit and tree.12 Similar to these resorcinol derivatives, the urushiol resin found in poison ivy and poison oak is a catechol derivative.2 Importantly, both resorcinols and catechols are isomers of the same aromatic phenol—dihydroxybenzene. Because of these similarities, it is thought that the allergens in mangos may cross-react with urushiol in poison ivy or poison oak.23 Alongside their shared categorization in the Anacardiaceae family, it is hypothesized that this cross-reactivity underlies the sensitization that has been noted between mango and poison ivy or poison oak exposure.12,23,24 Thus, ACD often can occur on initial contact with the mango tree or its components, as a prior exposure to poison ivy or poison oak may serve as the inciting factor for hypersensitization. The majority of reported cases in the literature also occurred in countries where exposure to poison ivy and poison oak are common, further supporting the notion that these compounds may provide a sensitizing trigger for a future mango contact allergy.12
A detailed clinical history combined with adjunctive diagnostic support from patch testing and histopathology of biopsied skin lesions classically are used in the diagnosis of mango-induced ACD. Due to its ability to provide quick and noninvasive in vivo imaging of cutaneous lesions, RCM's applications have expanded to include evaluation of inflammatory skin diseases such as contact dermatitis. Many features of contact dermatitis identified via RCM are common between ACD and irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) and include disruption of the stratum corneum, parakeratosis, vesiculation, spongiosis, and exocytosis.6,10,25 Studies also have described features shown via RCM that are unique to ACD, including vasodilation and intercellular edema, compared to more distinct targetoid keratinocytes and detached corneocytes seen in ICD.6,10,25 Studies by Astner et al5,6 demonstrated a wide range of sensitivity from 52% to 96% and a high specificity of RCM greater than 95% for many of the aforementioned features of contact dermatitis, including disruption of the stratum corneum, parakeratosis, spongiosis, and exocytosis. Additional studies have further strengthened these findings, demonstrating sensitivity and specificity values of 83% and 92% for contact dermatitis under RCM, respectively.26 Importantly, given the similarities and potentially large overlap of features between ACD and ICD identified via RCM as well as findings seen on physical examination and histopathology, an emphasis on clinical correlation is essential when differentiating between these 2 variants of contact dermatitis. Thus, taken in consideration with clinical contexts, RCM has shown potent diagnostic accuracy and great potential to support the evaluation of ACD alongside patch testing and histopathology.
Final Thoughts
Contact allergy to the mango tree and its components is uncommon. We report a unique case of mango sap–induced ACD evaluated and diagnosed via dynamic visualization under RCM. As a noninvasive and reproducible imaging technique with resolutions comparable to histopathologic analysis, RCM is a promising tool that can be used to support the diagnostic evaluation of ACD.
The mango tree (Mangifera indica) produces nutrient-dense fruit—known colloquially as the “king of fruits”—that is widely consumed across the world. Native to southern Asia, the mango tree is a member of the Anacardiaceae family, a large family of flowering, fruit-bearing plants.1 Many members of the Anacardiaceae family, which includes poison ivy and poison oak, are known to produce urushiol, a skin irritant associated with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD).2 Interestingly, despite its widespread consumption and categorization in the Anacardiaceae family, allergic reactions to mango are comparatively rare; they occur as either immediate type I hypersensitivity reactions manifesting with rapid-onset symptoms such as urticaria, wheezing, and angioedema, or delayed type IV hypersensitivity reactions manifesting as ACD.3 Although exposure to components of the mango tree has been most characteristically linked to type IV hypersensitivity reactions, there remain fewer than 40 reported cases of mango-induced ACD since it was first described in 1939.4
Evaluation of ACD most commonly includes a thorough clinical assessment with diagnostic support from patch testing and histopathologic review following skin biopsy. In recent years, reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) has shown promising potential to join the repertoire of diagnostic tools for ACD by enabling dynamic and high-resolution imaging of contact dermatitis in vivo.5-10 Reflectance confocal microscopy is a noninvasive optical imaging technique that uses a low-energy diode laser to penetrate the layers of the skin. The resulting reflected light generates images that facilitate visualization of cutaneous structures to the depth of the papillary dermis.11 While it is most commonly used in skin cancer diagnostics, preliminary studies also have shown an emerging role for RCM in the evaluation of eczematous and inflammatory skin disease, including contact dermatitis.5-10 Herein, we present a unique case of mango sap–induced ACD imaged and diagnosed in real time via RCM.
Case Report
A 39-year-old woman presented to our clinic with a pruritic vesicular eruption on the right leg of 2 weeks’ duration that initially had developed within 7 days of exposure to mango tree sap (Figure 1). The patient reported having experienced similar pruritic eruptions in the past following contact with mango sap while eating mangos but denied any history of reactions from ingestion of the fruit. She also reported a history of robust reactions to poison ivy; however, a timeline specifying the order of first exposure to these irritants was unknown. She denied any personal or family history of atopic conditions.

The affected skin was imaged in real time during clinic using RCM, which showed an inflammatory infiltrate represented by dark spongiotic vesicles containing bright cells (Figure 2). Additional RCM imaging at the level of the stratum spinosum showed dark spongiotic areas with bright inflammatory cells infiltrating the vesicles, which were surrounded by normal skin showing a typical epidermal honeycomb pattern (Figure 3). These findings were diagnostic of ACD secondary to exposure to mango sap. The patient was advised to apply clobetasol cream 0.05% to the affected area. Notable improvement of the rash was noted within 10 days of treatment.


Comment
Exposure to the mango tree and its fruit is a rare cause of ACD, with few reported cases in the literature. The majority of known instances have occurred in non–mango-cultivating countries, largely the United States, although cases also have been reported in Canada, Australia, France, Japan, and Thailand.3,12 Mango-induced contact allergy follows a roughly equal distribution between males and females and most often occurs in young adults during the third and fourth decades of life.4,12-21 Importantly, delayed-type hypersensitivity reactions to mango can manifest as either localized or systemic ACD. Localized ACD can be induced via direct contact with the mango tree and its components or ingestion of the fruit.3,12,22 Conversely, systemic ACD is primarily stimulated by ingestion of the fruit. In our case, the patient had no history of allergy following mango ingestion, and her ACD was prompted by isolated contact with mango sap. The time from exposure to symptom onset of known instances of mango ACD varies widely, ranging from less than 24 hours to as long as 9 days.3,12 Diagnosis of mango-induced ACD largely is guided by clinical findings. Presenting symptoms often include an eczematous, vesicular, pruritic rash on affected areas of the skin, frequently the head, neck, and extremities. Patients also commonly present with linear papulovesicular lesions and periorbital or perioral edema.
The suspected allergens responsible for mango-induced ACD are derived from resorcinol—specifically heptadecadienyl resorcinol, heptadecenyl resorcinol, and pentadecyl resorcinol, which are collectively known as mango allergens.23 These allergens can be found within the pulp and skin of the mango fruit as well as in the bark and leaves of the mango tree, which may explain observed allergic reactions to components of both the mango fruit and tree.12 Similar to these resorcinol derivatives, the urushiol resin found in poison ivy and poison oak is a catechol derivative.2 Importantly, both resorcinols and catechols are isomers of the same aromatic phenol—dihydroxybenzene. Because of these similarities, it is thought that the allergens in mangos may cross-react with urushiol in poison ivy or poison oak.23 Alongside their shared categorization in the Anacardiaceae family, it is hypothesized that this cross-reactivity underlies the sensitization that has been noted between mango and poison ivy or poison oak exposure.12,23,24 Thus, ACD often can occur on initial contact with the mango tree or its components, as a prior exposure to poison ivy or poison oak may serve as the inciting factor for hypersensitization. The majority of reported cases in the literature also occurred in countries where exposure to poison ivy and poison oak are common, further supporting the notion that these compounds may provide a sensitizing trigger for a future mango contact allergy.12
A detailed clinical history combined with adjunctive diagnostic support from patch testing and histopathology of biopsied skin lesions classically are used in the diagnosis of mango-induced ACD. Due to its ability to provide quick and noninvasive in vivo imaging of cutaneous lesions, RCM's applications have expanded to include evaluation of inflammatory skin diseases such as contact dermatitis. Many features of contact dermatitis identified via RCM are common between ACD and irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) and include disruption of the stratum corneum, parakeratosis, vesiculation, spongiosis, and exocytosis.6,10,25 Studies also have described features shown via RCM that are unique to ACD, including vasodilation and intercellular edema, compared to more distinct targetoid keratinocytes and detached corneocytes seen in ICD.6,10,25 Studies by Astner et al5,6 demonstrated a wide range of sensitivity from 52% to 96% and a high specificity of RCM greater than 95% for many of the aforementioned features of contact dermatitis, including disruption of the stratum corneum, parakeratosis, spongiosis, and exocytosis. Additional studies have further strengthened these findings, demonstrating sensitivity and specificity values of 83% and 92% for contact dermatitis under RCM, respectively.26 Importantly, given the similarities and potentially large overlap of features between ACD and ICD identified via RCM as well as findings seen on physical examination and histopathology, an emphasis on clinical correlation is essential when differentiating between these 2 variants of contact dermatitis. Thus, taken in consideration with clinical contexts, RCM has shown potent diagnostic accuracy and great potential to support the evaluation of ACD alongside patch testing and histopathology.
Final Thoughts
Contact allergy to the mango tree and its components is uncommon. We report a unique case of mango sap–induced ACD evaluated and diagnosed via dynamic visualization under RCM. As a noninvasive and reproducible imaging technique with resolutions comparable to histopathologic analysis, RCM is a promising tool that can be used to support the diagnostic evaluation of ACD.
- Shah KA, Patel MB, Patel RJ, et al. Mangifera indica (mango). Pharmacogn Rev. 2010;4:42-48.
- Lofgran T, Mahabal GD. Toxicodendron toxicity. StatPearls [Internet]. Updated May 16, 2023. Accessed September 19, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK557866
- Sareen R, Shah A. Hypersensitivity manifestations to the fruit mango. Asia Pac Allergy. 2011;1:43-49.
- Zakon SJ. Contact dermatitis due to mango. JAMA. 1939;113:1808.
- Astner S, Gonzalez E, Cheung A, et al. Pilot study on the sensitivity and specificity of in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy in the diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2005;53:986-992.
- Astner S, Gonzalez S, Gonzalez E. Noninvasive evaluation of allergic and irritant contact dermatitis by in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy. Dermatitis. 2006;17:182-191.
- Csuka EA, Ward SC, Ekelem C, et al. Reflectance confocal microscopy, optical coherence tomography, and multiphoton microscopy in inflammatory skin disease diagnosis. Lasers Surg Med. 2021;53:776-797.
- Guichard A, Fanian F, Girardin P, et al. Allergic patch test and contact dermatitis by in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy [in French]. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2014;141:805-807.
- Sakanashi EN, Matsumura M, Kikuchi K, et al. A comparative study of allergic contact dermatitis by patch test versus reflectance confocal laser microscopy, with nickel and cobalt. Eur J Dermatol. 2010;20:705-711.
- Swindells K, Burnett N, Rius-Diaz F, et al. Reflectance confocal microscopy may differentiate acute allergic and irritant contact dermatitis in vivo. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004;50:220-228.
- Shahriari N, Grant-Kels JM, Rabinovitz H, et al. Reflectance confocal microscopy: principles, basic terminology, clinical indications, limitations, and practical considerations. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84:1-14.
- Berghea EC, Craiu M, Ali S, et al. Contact allergy induced by mango (Mangifera indica): a relevant topic? Medicina (Kaunas). 2021;57:1240.
- O’Hern K, Zhang F, Zug KA, et al. “Mango slice” dermatitis: pediatric allergic contact dermatitis to mango pulp and skin. Dermatitis. 2022;33:E46-E47.
- Raison-Peyron N, Aljaber F, Al Ali OA, et al. Mango dermatitis: an unusual cause of eyelid dermatitis in France. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:599-600.
- Alipour Tehrany Y, Coulombe J. Mango allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:241-242.
- Yoo MJ, Carius BM. Mango dermatitis after urushiol sensitization. Clin Pract Cases Emerg Med. 2019;3:361-363.
- Miyazawa H, Nishie W, Hata H, et al. A severe case of mango dermatitis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2018;32:E160-E161.
- Trehan I, Meuli GJ. Mango contact allergy. J Travel Med. 2010;17:284.
- Wiwanitkit V. Mango dermatitis. Indian J Dermatol. 2008;53:158.
- Weinstein S, Bassiri-Tehrani S, Cohen DE. Allergic contact dermatitis to mango flesh. Int J Dermatol. 2004;43:195-196.
- Calvert ML, Robertson I, Samaratunga H. Mango dermatitis: allergic contact dermatitis to Mangifera indica. Australas J Dermatol. 1996;37:59-60.
- Thoo CH, Freeman S. Hypersensitivity reaction to the ingestion of mango flesh. Australas J Dermatol. 2008;49:116-119.
- Oka K, Saito F, Yasuhara T, et al. A study of cross-reactions between mango contact allergens and urushiol. Contact Dermatitis. 2004;51:292-296.
- Keil H, Wasserman D, Dawson CR. Mango dermatitis and its relationship to poison ivy hypersensitivity. Ann Allergy. 1946;4: 268-281.
- Maarouf M, Costello CM, Gonzalez S, et al. In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy: emerging role in noninvasive diagnosis and monitoring of eczematous dermatoses. Actas Dermosifiliogr (Engl Ed). 2019;110:626-636.
- Koller S, Gerger A, Ahlgrimm-Siess V, et al. In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy of erythematosquamous skin diseases. Exp Dermatol. 2009;18:536-540.
- Shah KA, Patel MB, Patel RJ, et al. Mangifera indica (mango). Pharmacogn Rev. 2010;4:42-48.
- Lofgran T, Mahabal GD. Toxicodendron toxicity. StatPearls [Internet]. Updated May 16, 2023. Accessed September 19, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK557866
- Sareen R, Shah A. Hypersensitivity manifestations to the fruit mango. Asia Pac Allergy. 2011;1:43-49.
- Zakon SJ. Contact dermatitis due to mango. JAMA. 1939;113:1808.
- Astner S, Gonzalez E, Cheung A, et al. Pilot study on the sensitivity and specificity of in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy in the diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2005;53:986-992.
- Astner S, Gonzalez S, Gonzalez E. Noninvasive evaluation of allergic and irritant contact dermatitis by in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy. Dermatitis. 2006;17:182-191.
- Csuka EA, Ward SC, Ekelem C, et al. Reflectance confocal microscopy, optical coherence tomography, and multiphoton microscopy in inflammatory skin disease diagnosis. Lasers Surg Med. 2021;53:776-797.
- Guichard A, Fanian F, Girardin P, et al. Allergic patch test and contact dermatitis by in vivo reflectance confocal microscopy [in French]. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2014;141:805-807.
- Sakanashi EN, Matsumura M, Kikuchi K, et al. A comparative study of allergic contact dermatitis by patch test versus reflectance confocal laser microscopy, with nickel and cobalt. Eur J Dermatol. 2010;20:705-711.
- Swindells K, Burnett N, Rius-Diaz F, et al. Reflectance confocal microscopy may differentiate acute allergic and irritant contact dermatitis in vivo. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2004;50:220-228.
- Shahriari N, Grant-Kels JM, Rabinovitz H, et al. Reflectance confocal microscopy: principles, basic terminology, clinical indications, limitations, and practical considerations. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84:1-14.
- Berghea EC, Craiu M, Ali S, et al. Contact allergy induced by mango (Mangifera indica): a relevant topic? Medicina (Kaunas). 2021;57:1240.
- O’Hern K, Zhang F, Zug KA, et al. “Mango slice” dermatitis: pediatric allergic contact dermatitis to mango pulp and skin. Dermatitis. 2022;33:E46-E47.
- Raison-Peyron N, Aljaber F, Al Ali OA, et al. Mango dermatitis: an unusual cause of eyelid dermatitis in France. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:599-600.
- Alipour Tehrany Y, Coulombe J. Mango allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85:241-242.
- Yoo MJ, Carius BM. Mango dermatitis after urushiol sensitization. Clin Pract Cases Emerg Med. 2019;3:361-363.
- Miyazawa H, Nishie W, Hata H, et al. A severe case of mango dermatitis. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2018;32:E160-E161.
- Trehan I, Meuli GJ. Mango contact allergy. J Travel Med. 2010;17:284.
- Wiwanitkit V. Mango dermatitis. Indian J Dermatol. 2008;53:158.
- Weinstein S, Bassiri-Tehrani S, Cohen DE. Allergic contact dermatitis to mango flesh. Int J Dermatol. 2004;43:195-196.
- Calvert ML, Robertson I, Samaratunga H. Mango dermatitis: allergic contact dermatitis to Mangifera indica. Australas J Dermatol. 1996;37:59-60.
- Thoo CH, Freeman S. Hypersensitivity reaction to the ingestion of mango flesh. Australas J Dermatol. 2008;49:116-119.
- Oka K, Saito F, Yasuhara T, et al. A study of cross-reactions between mango contact allergens and urushiol. Contact Dermatitis. 2004;51:292-296.
- Keil H, Wasserman D, Dawson CR. Mango dermatitis and its relationship to poison ivy hypersensitivity. Ann Allergy. 1946;4: 268-281.
- Maarouf M, Costello CM, Gonzalez S, et al. In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy: emerging role in noninvasive diagnosis and monitoring of eczematous dermatoses. Actas Dermosifiliogr (Engl Ed). 2019;110:626-636.
- Koller S, Gerger A, Ahlgrimm-Siess V, et al. In vivo reflectance confocal microscopy of erythematosquamous skin diseases. Exp Dermatol. 2009;18:536-540.
Practice Points
- Contact with mango tree sap can induce allergic contact dermatitis.
- Reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) is a noninvasive imaging technique that can provide real-time in vivo visualization of affected skin in contact dermatitis.
- Predominant findings of contact dermatitis under RCM include disruption of the stratum corneum; parakeratosis; vesiculation; spongiosis; and exocytosis, vasodilation, and intercellular edema more specific to the allergic subtype.
Erythema Nodosum Triggered by a Bite From a Copperhead Snake
The clinical manifestations of snakebites vary based on the species of snake, bite location, and amount and strength of the venom injected. Locally acting toxins in snake venom predominantly consist of enzymes, such as phospholipase A2, that cause local tissue destruction and can result in pain, swelling, blistering, ecchymosis, and tissue necrosis at the site of the bite within hours to days after the bite.1 Systemically acting toxins can target a wide variety of tissues and cause severe systemic complications including paralysis, rhabdomyolysis secondary to muscle damage, coagulopathy, sepsis, and cardiorespiratory failure.2
Although pain and swelling following snakebites typically resolve by 1 month after envenomation, copperhead snakes—a type of pit viper—may cause residual symptoms of pain and swelling lasting for a year or more.3 Additional cutaneous manifestations of copperhead snakebites include wound infections at the bite site, such as cellulitis and necrotizing fasciitis. More devastating complications that have been described following snake envenomation include tissue injury of an entire extremity and development of compartment syndrome, which requires urgent fasciotomy to prevent potential loss of the affected limb.4
Physicians should be aware of the potential complications of snakebites to properly manage and counsel their patients. We describe a 42-year-old woman with tender, erythematous, subcutaneous nodules persisting for 4 months following a copperhead snakebite. A biopsy confirmed the diagnosis of snakebite-associated erythema nodosum (EN).
Case Report
A 42-year-old woman presented to our clinic with progressive tender, pruritic, deep-seated, erythematous nodules in multiple locations on the legs after sustaining a bite by a copperhead snake on the left foot 4 months prior. The lesions tended to fluctuate in intensity. In the days following the bite, she initially developed painful red bumps on the left foot just proximal to the bite site with associated pain and swelling extending up to just below the left knee. She reported no other notable symptoms such as fever, arthralgia, fatigue, or gastrointestinal tract symptoms. Physical examination revealed bilateral pitting edema, which was worse in the left leg, along with multiple deep, palpable, tender subcutaneous nodules with erythematous surface change (Figure 1).

Workup performed by an outside provider over the previous month included 2 venous duplex ultrasounds of the left leg, which showed no signs of deep vein thrombosis. Additionally, the patient underwent lateral and anteroposterior radiographs of the left foot, tibia, and fibula, which showed no evidence of fracture.
Given the morphology and distribution of the lesions (Figure 2), EN was strongly favored as the cause of the symptoms, and a biopsy confirmed the diagnosis. All immunohistochemical stains including auramine-rhodamine for acid-fast bacilli, Grocott-Gomori methenamine silver for fungal organisms, and Brown and Brenn were negative. Given the waxing and waning course of the lesions, which suggested an active neutrophilic rather than purely chronic granulomatous phase of EN, the patient was treated with colchicine 0.6 mg twice daily for 1 month.

Causes of EN and Clinical Manifestations
Erythema nodosum is a common form of septal panniculitis that can be precipitated by inflammatory conditions, infection, or medications (commonly oral contraceptive pills) but often is idiopathic.5 The acute phase is neutrophilic, with evolution over time to a granulomatous phase. Common etiologies include sarcoidosis; inflammatory bowel disease; and bacterial or fungal infections such as Streptococcus (especially common in children), histoplasmosis, and coccidioidomycosis. The patient was otherwise healthy and was not taking any medications that are known triggers of EN. A PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE in the English-language literature using the terms copperhead snake bite, erythema nodosum snake, and copperhead snake erythema nodosum revealed no reports of EN following a bite from a copperhead snake; however, in one case, an adder bite led to erysipelas, likely due to disturbed blood and lymphatic flow, which then triggered EN.6 Additionally, EN has been reported as a delayed reaction to jellyfish stings.7
Clinical features of EN include the development of tender, erythematous, subcutaneous nodules and plaques most frequently over the pretibial region. Lesions typically evolve from raised, deep-seated nodules into flat indurated plaques over a span of weeks. Occasionally, there is a slight prodromal phase marked by nonspecific symptoms such as fever and arthralgia lasting for 3 to 6 days. Erythema nodosum typically results in spontaneous resolution after 4 to 8 weeks, and management involves treatment of any underlying condition with symptomatic care. Interestingly, our patient experienced persistent symptoms over the course of 4 months, with development of new nodular lesions throughout this time period. The most frequently used drugs for the management of symptomatic EN include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, colchicine, and potassium iodide.8 A characteristic histologic finding of the granulomatous phase is the Miescher radial granuloma, which is a septal collection of histiocytes surrounding a cleft.9
Snakebite Reactions
Snakebites can result in a wide range of local and systemic manifestations, as snake venom may contain 20 or more toxins.10 Local complications of pit viper bites include pain, swelling, and fang marks; when examining fang marks, the presence of 2 distinct puncture wounds often indicates envenomation with a poisonous snake, whereas nonvenomous snakebites often result in smaller puncture wounds arranged in an arc. Following bites, pain can develop immediately and spread proximally up the affected limb, which occurred in our patient in the days following the bite. Intense local reactions can occur, as bites often result in intense edema of the affected limb spreading to the trunk in the days to weeks after the bite, occasionally accompanied by regional lymphadenopathy. Some bites can result in local necrosis and secondary bacterial infection caused by organisms in the oral cavity of the culprit snake.
Although they were not present in our patient, snakebites can result in a wide range of systemic toxicities ranging from clotting defects and hemolysis to neurotoxicity, myotoxicity, and nephrotoxicity.10 In severe cases, snake venom can result in disseminated intravascular coagulation, sepsis, and cardiorespiratory collapse.
The eastern copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix) is a species of venomous snake that is endemic to eastern North America. Copperheads are members of the subfamily Crotalinae in the family Viperidae.11 Reported reactions to copperhead bites include cellulitis, necrotizing fasciitis, compartment syndrome, and tissue necrosis of an entire affected extremity.12,13 Our patient displayed no systemic symptoms to suggest envenomation.
Management of Snakebites
Treatment of snakebites varies based on the constellation and severity of symptoms as well as how recently the envenomation occurred. In urgent cases, antivenom may be administered to prevent further toxicity. In cases of progressive compartment syndrome, emergent surgical procedures such as fasciotomy or amputation are required to prevent further complications. When a superimposed bacterial infection is suspected, broad-spectrum antibiotics are required. Because our patient presented 4 months following the initial bite with isolated cutaneous manifestations, she was treated symptomatically with colchicine for EN.1,2
Final Thoughts
Our patient presented with EN following a bite from a copperhead snake. Physicians should be aware of possible etiologies of EN to evaluate patients who present with new-onset tender subcutaneous nodules. Additionally, physicians should be aware of venomous snakes endemic to their region and also understand the various complications that can result following a snakebite, with the potential for lingering cutaneous manifestations weeks to months following the initial bite.
- Warrell DA. Snake bite. Lancet. 2010;375:77-88. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61754-2
- White J. Overview of venomous snakes of the world. In: Dart RC, eds. Medical Toxicology. 3rd ed. Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins; 2004:1543
- Spiller HA, Bosse GM. Prospective study of morbidity associated with snakebite envenomation. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 2003;41:125-130. doi:10.1081/clt-120019127
- Scharman EJ, Noffsinger VD. Copperhead snakebites: clinical severity of local effects. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;38:55-61. doi:10.1067/mem.2001.116148
- Hafsi W, Badri T. Erythema nodosum. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; November 28, 2022. Accessed July 22, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470369/
- Nowowiejska J, Baran A, Flisiak I. Rare coexistence of unilateral erythema nodosum with erysipelas in the area of previous adder bite. Przegl Epidemiol. 2020;74:355-361. doi:10.32394/pe.74.28
- Auerbach PS, Hays JT. Erythema nodosum following a jellyfish sting. J Emerg Med. 1987;5:487-491. doi:10.1016/0736-4679(87)90211-3
- Gilchrist H, Patterson JW. Erythema nodosum and erythema induratum (nodular vasculitis): diagnosis and management. Dermatol Ther. 2010;23:320-327. doi:10.1111/j.1529-8019.2010.01332.x
- Sánchez Yus E, Sanz Vico MD, de Diego V. Miescher’s radial granuloma. a characteristic marker of erythema nodosum. Am J Dermatopathol. 1989;11:434-442. doi:10.1097/00000372-198910000-00005
- Mehta SR, Sashindran VK. Clinical features and management of snake bite. Med J Armed Forces India. 2002;58:247-249. doi:10.1016/S0377-1237(02)80140-X
- Brys AK, Gandolfi BM, Levinson H, et al. Copperhead envenomation resulting in a rare case of hand compartment syndrome and subsequent fasciotomy. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015;3:E396. doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000000367
- Clark RF, Selden BS, Furbee B. The incidence of wound infection following crotalid envenomation. J Emerg Med. 1993;11:583-586. doi:10.1016/0736-4679(93)90313-v
- Buchanan JT, Thurman J. Crotalidae envenomation. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; October 3, 2022. Accessed July 22, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK551615/
The clinical manifestations of snakebites vary based on the species of snake, bite location, and amount and strength of the venom injected. Locally acting toxins in snake venom predominantly consist of enzymes, such as phospholipase A2, that cause local tissue destruction and can result in pain, swelling, blistering, ecchymosis, and tissue necrosis at the site of the bite within hours to days after the bite.1 Systemically acting toxins can target a wide variety of tissues and cause severe systemic complications including paralysis, rhabdomyolysis secondary to muscle damage, coagulopathy, sepsis, and cardiorespiratory failure.2
Although pain and swelling following snakebites typically resolve by 1 month after envenomation, copperhead snakes—a type of pit viper—may cause residual symptoms of pain and swelling lasting for a year or more.3 Additional cutaneous manifestations of copperhead snakebites include wound infections at the bite site, such as cellulitis and necrotizing fasciitis. More devastating complications that have been described following snake envenomation include tissue injury of an entire extremity and development of compartment syndrome, which requires urgent fasciotomy to prevent potential loss of the affected limb.4
Physicians should be aware of the potential complications of snakebites to properly manage and counsel their patients. We describe a 42-year-old woman with tender, erythematous, subcutaneous nodules persisting for 4 months following a copperhead snakebite. A biopsy confirmed the diagnosis of snakebite-associated erythema nodosum (EN).
Case Report
A 42-year-old woman presented to our clinic with progressive tender, pruritic, deep-seated, erythematous nodules in multiple locations on the legs after sustaining a bite by a copperhead snake on the left foot 4 months prior. The lesions tended to fluctuate in intensity. In the days following the bite, she initially developed painful red bumps on the left foot just proximal to the bite site with associated pain and swelling extending up to just below the left knee. She reported no other notable symptoms such as fever, arthralgia, fatigue, or gastrointestinal tract symptoms. Physical examination revealed bilateral pitting edema, which was worse in the left leg, along with multiple deep, palpable, tender subcutaneous nodules with erythematous surface change (Figure 1).

Workup performed by an outside provider over the previous month included 2 venous duplex ultrasounds of the left leg, which showed no signs of deep vein thrombosis. Additionally, the patient underwent lateral and anteroposterior radiographs of the left foot, tibia, and fibula, which showed no evidence of fracture.
Given the morphology and distribution of the lesions (Figure 2), EN was strongly favored as the cause of the symptoms, and a biopsy confirmed the diagnosis. All immunohistochemical stains including auramine-rhodamine for acid-fast bacilli, Grocott-Gomori methenamine silver for fungal organisms, and Brown and Brenn were negative. Given the waxing and waning course of the lesions, which suggested an active neutrophilic rather than purely chronic granulomatous phase of EN, the patient was treated with colchicine 0.6 mg twice daily for 1 month.

Causes of EN and Clinical Manifestations
Erythema nodosum is a common form of septal panniculitis that can be precipitated by inflammatory conditions, infection, or medications (commonly oral contraceptive pills) but often is idiopathic.5 The acute phase is neutrophilic, with evolution over time to a granulomatous phase. Common etiologies include sarcoidosis; inflammatory bowel disease; and bacterial or fungal infections such as Streptococcus (especially common in children), histoplasmosis, and coccidioidomycosis. The patient was otherwise healthy and was not taking any medications that are known triggers of EN. A PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE in the English-language literature using the terms copperhead snake bite, erythema nodosum snake, and copperhead snake erythema nodosum revealed no reports of EN following a bite from a copperhead snake; however, in one case, an adder bite led to erysipelas, likely due to disturbed blood and lymphatic flow, which then triggered EN.6 Additionally, EN has been reported as a delayed reaction to jellyfish stings.7
Clinical features of EN include the development of tender, erythematous, subcutaneous nodules and plaques most frequently over the pretibial region. Lesions typically evolve from raised, deep-seated nodules into flat indurated plaques over a span of weeks. Occasionally, there is a slight prodromal phase marked by nonspecific symptoms such as fever and arthralgia lasting for 3 to 6 days. Erythema nodosum typically results in spontaneous resolution after 4 to 8 weeks, and management involves treatment of any underlying condition with symptomatic care. Interestingly, our patient experienced persistent symptoms over the course of 4 months, with development of new nodular lesions throughout this time period. The most frequently used drugs for the management of symptomatic EN include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, colchicine, and potassium iodide.8 A characteristic histologic finding of the granulomatous phase is the Miescher radial granuloma, which is a septal collection of histiocytes surrounding a cleft.9
Snakebite Reactions
Snakebites can result in a wide range of local and systemic manifestations, as snake venom may contain 20 or more toxins.10 Local complications of pit viper bites include pain, swelling, and fang marks; when examining fang marks, the presence of 2 distinct puncture wounds often indicates envenomation with a poisonous snake, whereas nonvenomous snakebites often result in smaller puncture wounds arranged in an arc. Following bites, pain can develop immediately and spread proximally up the affected limb, which occurred in our patient in the days following the bite. Intense local reactions can occur, as bites often result in intense edema of the affected limb spreading to the trunk in the days to weeks after the bite, occasionally accompanied by regional lymphadenopathy. Some bites can result in local necrosis and secondary bacterial infection caused by organisms in the oral cavity of the culprit snake.
Although they were not present in our patient, snakebites can result in a wide range of systemic toxicities ranging from clotting defects and hemolysis to neurotoxicity, myotoxicity, and nephrotoxicity.10 In severe cases, snake venom can result in disseminated intravascular coagulation, sepsis, and cardiorespiratory collapse.
The eastern copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix) is a species of venomous snake that is endemic to eastern North America. Copperheads are members of the subfamily Crotalinae in the family Viperidae.11 Reported reactions to copperhead bites include cellulitis, necrotizing fasciitis, compartment syndrome, and tissue necrosis of an entire affected extremity.12,13 Our patient displayed no systemic symptoms to suggest envenomation.
Management of Snakebites
Treatment of snakebites varies based on the constellation and severity of symptoms as well as how recently the envenomation occurred. In urgent cases, antivenom may be administered to prevent further toxicity. In cases of progressive compartment syndrome, emergent surgical procedures such as fasciotomy or amputation are required to prevent further complications. When a superimposed bacterial infection is suspected, broad-spectrum antibiotics are required. Because our patient presented 4 months following the initial bite with isolated cutaneous manifestations, she was treated symptomatically with colchicine for EN.1,2
Final Thoughts
Our patient presented with EN following a bite from a copperhead snake. Physicians should be aware of possible etiologies of EN to evaluate patients who present with new-onset tender subcutaneous nodules. Additionally, physicians should be aware of venomous snakes endemic to their region and also understand the various complications that can result following a snakebite, with the potential for lingering cutaneous manifestations weeks to months following the initial bite.
The clinical manifestations of snakebites vary based on the species of snake, bite location, and amount and strength of the venom injected. Locally acting toxins in snake venom predominantly consist of enzymes, such as phospholipase A2, that cause local tissue destruction and can result in pain, swelling, blistering, ecchymosis, and tissue necrosis at the site of the bite within hours to days after the bite.1 Systemically acting toxins can target a wide variety of tissues and cause severe systemic complications including paralysis, rhabdomyolysis secondary to muscle damage, coagulopathy, sepsis, and cardiorespiratory failure.2
Although pain and swelling following snakebites typically resolve by 1 month after envenomation, copperhead snakes—a type of pit viper—may cause residual symptoms of pain and swelling lasting for a year or more.3 Additional cutaneous manifestations of copperhead snakebites include wound infections at the bite site, such as cellulitis and necrotizing fasciitis. More devastating complications that have been described following snake envenomation include tissue injury of an entire extremity and development of compartment syndrome, which requires urgent fasciotomy to prevent potential loss of the affected limb.4
Physicians should be aware of the potential complications of snakebites to properly manage and counsel their patients. We describe a 42-year-old woman with tender, erythematous, subcutaneous nodules persisting for 4 months following a copperhead snakebite. A biopsy confirmed the diagnosis of snakebite-associated erythema nodosum (EN).
Case Report
A 42-year-old woman presented to our clinic with progressive tender, pruritic, deep-seated, erythematous nodules in multiple locations on the legs after sustaining a bite by a copperhead snake on the left foot 4 months prior. The lesions tended to fluctuate in intensity. In the days following the bite, she initially developed painful red bumps on the left foot just proximal to the bite site with associated pain and swelling extending up to just below the left knee. She reported no other notable symptoms such as fever, arthralgia, fatigue, or gastrointestinal tract symptoms. Physical examination revealed bilateral pitting edema, which was worse in the left leg, along with multiple deep, palpable, tender subcutaneous nodules with erythematous surface change (Figure 1).

Workup performed by an outside provider over the previous month included 2 venous duplex ultrasounds of the left leg, which showed no signs of deep vein thrombosis. Additionally, the patient underwent lateral and anteroposterior radiographs of the left foot, tibia, and fibula, which showed no evidence of fracture.
Given the morphology and distribution of the lesions (Figure 2), EN was strongly favored as the cause of the symptoms, and a biopsy confirmed the diagnosis. All immunohistochemical stains including auramine-rhodamine for acid-fast bacilli, Grocott-Gomori methenamine silver for fungal organisms, and Brown and Brenn were negative. Given the waxing and waning course of the lesions, which suggested an active neutrophilic rather than purely chronic granulomatous phase of EN, the patient was treated with colchicine 0.6 mg twice daily for 1 month.

Causes of EN and Clinical Manifestations
Erythema nodosum is a common form of septal panniculitis that can be precipitated by inflammatory conditions, infection, or medications (commonly oral contraceptive pills) but often is idiopathic.5 The acute phase is neutrophilic, with evolution over time to a granulomatous phase. Common etiologies include sarcoidosis; inflammatory bowel disease; and bacterial or fungal infections such as Streptococcus (especially common in children), histoplasmosis, and coccidioidomycosis. The patient was otherwise healthy and was not taking any medications that are known triggers of EN. A PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE in the English-language literature using the terms copperhead snake bite, erythema nodosum snake, and copperhead snake erythema nodosum revealed no reports of EN following a bite from a copperhead snake; however, in one case, an adder bite led to erysipelas, likely due to disturbed blood and lymphatic flow, which then triggered EN.6 Additionally, EN has been reported as a delayed reaction to jellyfish stings.7
Clinical features of EN include the development of tender, erythematous, subcutaneous nodules and plaques most frequently over the pretibial region. Lesions typically evolve from raised, deep-seated nodules into flat indurated plaques over a span of weeks. Occasionally, there is a slight prodromal phase marked by nonspecific symptoms such as fever and arthralgia lasting for 3 to 6 days. Erythema nodosum typically results in spontaneous resolution after 4 to 8 weeks, and management involves treatment of any underlying condition with symptomatic care. Interestingly, our patient experienced persistent symptoms over the course of 4 months, with development of new nodular lesions throughout this time period. The most frequently used drugs for the management of symptomatic EN include nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, colchicine, and potassium iodide.8 A characteristic histologic finding of the granulomatous phase is the Miescher radial granuloma, which is a septal collection of histiocytes surrounding a cleft.9
Snakebite Reactions
Snakebites can result in a wide range of local and systemic manifestations, as snake venom may contain 20 or more toxins.10 Local complications of pit viper bites include pain, swelling, and fang marks; when examining fang marks, the presence of 2 distinct puncture wounds often indicates envenomation with a poisonous snake, whereas nonvenomous snakebites often result in smaller puncture wounds arranged in an arc. Following bites, pain can develop immediately and spread proximally up the affected limb, which occurred in our patient in the days following the bite. Intense local reactions can occur, as bites often result in intense edema of the affected limb spreading to the trunk in the days to weeks after the bite, occasionally accompanied by regional lymphadenopathy. Some bites can result in local necrosis and secondary bacterial infection caused by organisms in the oral cavity of the culprit snake.
Although they were not present in our patient, snakebites can result in a wide range of systemic toxicities ranging from clotting defects and hemolysis to neurotoxicity, myotoxicity, and nephrotoxicity.10 In severe cases, snake venom can result in disseminated intravascular coagulation, sepsis, and cardiorespiratory collapse.
The eastern copperhead (Agkistrodon contortrix) is a species of venomous snake that is endemic to eastern North America. Copperheads are members of the subfamily Crotalinae in the family Viperidae.11 Reported reactions to copperhead bites include cellulitis, necrotizing fasciitis, compartment syndrome, and tissue necrosis of an entire affected extremity.12,13 Our patient displayed no systemic symptoms to suggest envenomation.
Management of Snakebites
Treatment of snakebites varies based on the constellation and severity of symptoms as well as how recently the envenomation occurred. In urgent cases, antivenom may be administered to prevent further toxicity. In cases of progressive compartment syndrome, emergent surgical procedures such as fasciotomy or amputation are required to prevent further complications. When a superimposed bacterial infection is suspected, broad-spectrum antibiotics are required. Because our patient presented 4 months following the initial bite with isolated cutaneous manifestations, she was treated symptomatically with colchicine for EN.1,2
Final Thoughts
Our patient presented with EN following a bite from a copperhead snake. Physicians should be aware of possible etiologies of EN to evaluate patients who present with new-onset tender subcutaneous nodules. Additionally, physicians should be aware of venomous snakes endemic to their region and also understand the various complications that can result following a snakebite, with the potential for lingering cutaneous manifestations weeks to months following the initial bite.
- Warrell DA. Snake bite. Lancet. 2010;375:77-88. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61754-2
- White J. Overview of venomous snakes of the world. In: Dart RC, eds. Medical Toxicology. 3rd ed. Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins; 2004:1543
- Spiller HA, Bosse GM. Prospective study of morbidity associated with snakebite envenomation. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 2003;41:125-130. doi:10.1081/clt-120019127
- Scharman EJ, Noffsinger VD. Copperhead snakebites: clinical severity of local effects. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;38:55-61. doi:10.1067/mem.2001.116148
- Hafsi W, Badri T. Erythema nodosum. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; November 28, 2022. Accessed July 22, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470369/
- Nowowiejska J, Baran A, Flisiak I. Rare coexistence of unilateral erythema nodosum with erysipelas in the area of previous adder bite. Przegl Epidemiol. 2020;74:355-361. doi:10.32394/pe.74.28
- Auerbach PS, Hays JT. Erythema nodosum following a jellyfish sting. J Emerg Med. 1987;5:487-491. doi:10.1016/0736-4679(87)90211-3
- Gilchrist H, Patterson JW. Erythema nodosum and erythema induratum (nodular vasculitis): diagnosis and management. Dermatol Ther. 2010;23:320-327. doi:10.1111/j.1529-8019.2010.01332.x
- Sánchez Yus E, Sanz Vico MD, de Diego V. Miescher’s radial granuloma. a characteristic marker of erythema nodosum. Am J Dermatopathol. 1989;11:434-442. doi:10.1097/00000372-198910000-00005
- Mehta SR, Sashindran VK. Clinical features and management of snake bite. Med J Armed Forces India. 2002;58:247-249. doi:10.1016/S0377-1237(02)80140-X
- Brys AK, Gandolfi BM, Levinson H, et al. Copperhead envenomation resulting in a rare case of hand compartment syndrome and subsequent fasciotomy. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015;3:E396. doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000000367
- Clark RF, Selden BS, Furbee B. The incidence of wound infection following crotalid envenomation. J Emerg Med. 1993;11:583-586. doi:10.1016/0736-4679(93)90313-v
- Buchanan JT, Thurman J. Crotalidae envenomation. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; October 3, 2022. Accessed July 22, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK551615/
- Warrell DA. Snake bite. Lancet. 2010;375:77-88. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(09)61754-2
- White J. Overview of venomous snakes of the world. In: Dart RC, eds. Medical Toxicology. 3rd ed. Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins; 2004:1543
- Spiller HA, Bosse GM. Prospective study of morbidity associated with snakebite envenomation. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 2003;41:125-130. doi:10.1081/clt-120019127
- Scharman EJ, Noffsinger VD. Copperhead snakebites: clinical severity of local effects. Ann Emerg Med. 2001;38:55-61. doi:10.1067/mem.2001.116148
- Hafsi W, Badri T. Erythema nodosum. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; November 28, 2022. Accessed July 22, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470369/
- Nowowiejska J, Baran A, Flisiak I. Rare coexistence of unilateral erythema nodosum with erysipelas in the area of previous adder bite. Przegl Epidemiol. 2020;74:355-361. doi:10.32394/pe.74.28
- Auerbach PS, Hays JT. Erythema nodosum following a jellyfish sting. J Emerg Med. 1987;5:487-491. doi:10.1016/0736-4679(87)90211-3
- Gilchrist H, Patterson JW. Erythema nodosum and erythema induratum (nodular vasculitis): diagnosis and management. Dermatol Ther. 2010;23:320-327. doi:10.1111/j.1529-8019.2010.01332.x
- Sánchez Yus E, Sanz Vico MD, de Diego V. Miescher’s radial granuloma. a characteristic marker of erythema nodosum. Am J Dermatopathol. 1989;11:434-442. doi:10.1097/00000372-198910000-00005
- Mehta SR, Sashindran VK. Clinical features and management of snake bite. Med J Armed Forces India. 2002;58:247-249. doi:10.1016/S0377-1237(02)80140-X
- Brys AK, Gandolfi BM, Levinson H, et al. Copperhead envenomation resulting in a rare case of hand compartment syndrome and subsequent fasciotomy. Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open. 2015;3:E396. doi:10.1097/GOX.0000000000000367
- Clark RF, Selden BS, Furbee B. The incidence of wound infection following crotalid envenomation. J Emerg Med. 1993;11:583-586. doi:10.1016/0736-4679(93)90313-v
- Buchanan JT, Thurman J. Crotalidae envenomation. In: StatPearls. StatPearls Publishing; October 3, 2022. Accessed July 22, 2024. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK551615/
Practice Points
- Erythema nodosum (EN) can occur following snakebites from pit vipers such as the eastern copperhead.
- The acute phase of EN is neutrophilic and responds to colchicine. The chronic phase of EN is granulomatous and responds best to rest and elevation as well as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and iodides.
Brazilian Peppertree: Watch Out for This Lesser-Known Relative of Poison Ivy
Brazilian peppertree (Schinus terebinthifolia), a member of the Anacardiaceae family, is an internationally invasive plant that causes allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in susceptible individuals. This noxious weed has settled into the landscape of the southern United States and continues to expand. Its key identifying features include its year-round white flowers as well as a peppery and turpentinelike aroma created by cracking its bright red berries. The ACD associated with contact—primarily with the plant’s sap—stems from known alkenyl phenols, cardol and cardanol. Treatment of Brazilian peppertree–associated ACD parallels that for poison ivy. As this pest increases its range, dermatologists living in endemic areas should familiarize themselves with Brazilian peppertree and its potential for harm.
Brazilian Peppertree Morphology and Geography
Plants in the Anacardiaceae family contribute to more ACD than any other family, and its 80 genera include most of the urushiol-containing plants, such as Toxicodendron (poison ivy, poison oak, poison sumac, Japanese lacquer tree), Anacardium (cashew tree), Mangifera (mango fruit), Semecarpus (India marking nut tree), and Schinus (Brazilian peppertree). Deciduous and evergreen tree members of the Anacardiaceae family grow primarily in tropical and subtropical locations and produce thick resins, 5-petalled flowers, and small fruit known as drupes. The genus name for Brazilian peppertree, Schinus, derives from Latin and Greek words meaning “mastic tree,” a relative of the pistachio tree that the Brazilian peppertree resembles.1 Brazilian peppertree leaves look and smell similar to Pistacia terebinthus (turpentine tree or terebinth), from which the species name terebinthifolia derives.2
Brazilian peppertree originated in South America, particularly Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina.3 Since the 1840s,4 it has been an invasive weed in the United States, notably in Florida, California, Hawaii, Alabama, Georgia,5 Arizona,6 Nevada,3 and Texas.5,7 The plant also grows throughout the world, including parts of Africa, Asia, Central America, Europe,6 New Zealand,8 Australia, and various islands.9 The plant expertly outcompetes neighboring plants and has prompted control and eradication efforts in many locations.3
Identifying Features and Allergenic Plant Parts
Brazilian peppertree can be either a shrub or tree up to 30 feet tall.4 As an evergreen, it retains its leaves year-round. During fruiting seasons (primarily December through March7), bright red or pink (depending on the variety3) berries appear (Figure 1A) and contribute to its nickname “Florida holly.” Although generally considered an unwelcome guest in Florida, it does display white flowers (Figure 1B) year-round, especially from September to November.9 It characteristically exhibits 3 to 13 leaflets per leaf.10 The leaflets’ ovoid and ridged edges, netlike vasculature, shiny hue, and aroma can help identify the plant (Figure 2A). For decades, the sap of the Brazilian peppertree has been associated with skin irritation (Figure 2B).6 Although the sap of the plant serves as the main culprit of Brazilian peppertree–associated ACD, it appears that other parts of the plant, including the fruit, can cause irritating effects to skin on contact.11,12 The leaves, trunk, and fruit can be harmful to both humans and animals.6 Chemicals from flowers and crushed fruit also can lead to irritating effects in the respiratory tract if aspirated.13


Urushiol, an oily resin present in most plants of the Anacardiaceae family,14 contains many chemicals, including allergenic phenols, catechols, and resorcinols.15 Urushiol-allergic individuals develop dermatitis upon exposure to Brazilian peppertree sap.6 Alkenyl phenols found in Brazilian peppertree lead to the cutaneous manifestations in sensitized patients.11,12 In 1983, Stahl et al11 identified a phenol, cardanol (chemical name 3-pentadecylphenol16) C15:1, in Brazilian peppertree fruit. The group further tested this compound’s effect on skin via patch testing, which showed an allergic response.11 Cashew nut shells (Anacardium occidentale) contain cardanol, anacardic acid (a phenolic acid), and cardol (a phenol with the chemical name 5-pentadecylresorcinol),15,16 though Stahl et al11 were unable to extract these 2 substances (if present) from Brazilian peppertree fruit. When exposed to cardol and anacardic acid, those allergic to poison ivy often develop ACD,15 and these 2 substances are more irritating than cardanol.11 A later study did identify cardol in addition to cardanol in Brazilian peppertree.12
Cutaneous Manifestations
Brazilian peppertree–induced ACD appears similar to other plant-induced ACD with linear streaks of erythema, juicy papules, vesicles, coalescing erythematous plaques, and/or occasional edema and bullae accompanied by intense pruritus.
Treatment
Avoiding contact with Brazilian peppertree is the first line of defense, and treatment for a reaction associated with exposure is similar to that of poison ivy.17 Application of cool compresses, calamine lotion, and topical astringents offer symptom alleviation, and topical steroids (eg, clobetasol propionate 0.05% twice daily) can improve mild localized ACD when given prior to formation of blisters. For more severe and diffuse ACD, oral steroids (eg, prednisone 1 mg/kg/d tapered over 2–3 weeks) likely are necessary, though intramuscular options greatly alleviate discomfort in more severe cases (eg, intramuscular triamcinolone acetonide 1 mg/kg combined with betamethasone 0.1 mg/kg). Physicians should monitor sites for any signs of superimposed bacterial infection and initiate antibiotics as necessary.17
- Zona S. The correct gender of Schinus (Anacardiaceae). Phytotaxa. 2015;222:075-077.
- Terebinth. Encyclopedia.com website. Updated May 17, 2018. Accessed July 9, 2024. https://www.encyclopedia.com/plants-and-animals/plants/plants/terebinth
- Brazilian pepper tree. iNaturalist website. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://www.inaturalist.org/guide_taxa/841531#:~:text=Throughout% 20South%20and%20Central%20America,and%20as%20a%20topical%20antiseptic
- Center for Aquatic and Invasive Plants. Schinus terebinthifolia. Brazilian peppertree. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://plants.ifas.ufl.edu/plant-directory/schinus-terebinthifolia/#:~:text=Species%20Overview&text=People%20sensitive%20to%20poison%20ivy,associated%20with%20its%20bloom%20period
- Brazilian peppertree (Schinus terebinthifolia). Early Detection & Distribution Mapping System. Accessed July 4, 2024. https://www.eddmaps.org/distribution/usstate.cfm?sub=78819
- Morton F. Brazilian pepper: its impact on people, animals, and the environment. Econ Bot. 1978;32:353-359.
- Fire Effects Information System. Schinus terebinthifolius. US Department of Agriculture website. Accessed July 4, 2024. https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/shrub/schter/all.html
- New Zealand Plant Conservation Network. Schinus terebinthifolius. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://www.nzpcn.org.nz/flora/species/schinus-terebinthifolius
- Rojas-Sandoval J, Acevedo-Rodriguez P. Schinus terebinthifolius (Brazilian pepper tree). CABI Compendium. July 23, 2014. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/10.1079/cabicompendium.49031
- Patocka J, Diz de Almeida J. Brazilian peppertree: review of pharmacology. Mil Med Sci Lett. 2017;86:32-41.
- Stahl E, Keller K, Blinn C. Cardanol, a skin irritant in pink pepper. Plant Medica. 1983;48:5-9.
- Skopp G, Opferkuch H-J, Schqenker G. n-Alkylphenols from Schinus terebinthifolius Raddi (Anacardiaceae). In German. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung C. 1987;42:1-16. https://doi.org/10.1515/znc-1987-1-203.
- Lloyd HA, Jaouni TM, Evans SL, et al. Terpenes of Schinus terebinthifolius. Phytochemistry. 1977;16:1301-1302.
- Goon ATJ, Goh CL. Plant dermatitis: Asian perspective. Indian J Dermatol. 2011;56:707-710.
- Rozas-Muñoz E, Lepoittevin JP, Pujol RM, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis to plants: understanding the chemistry will help our diagnostic approach. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2012;103:456-477.
- Caillol S. Cardanol: a promising building block for biobased polymers and additives. Curr Opin Green Sustain Chem. 2018;14: 26-32.
- Prok L, McGovern T. Poison ivy (Toxicodendron) dermatitis. UpToDate. Updated June 21, 2024. Accessed July 7, 2024. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/poison-ivy-toxicodendron-dermatitis#
Brazilian peppertree (Schinus terebinthifolia), a member of the Anacardiaceae family, is an internationally invasive plant that causes allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in susceptible individuals. This noxious weed has settled into the landscape of the southern United States and continues to expand. Its key identifying features include its year-round white flowers as well as a peppery and turpentinelike aroma created by cracking its bright red berries. The ACD associated with contact—primarily with the plant’s sap—stems from known alkenyl phenols, cardol and cardanol. Treatment of Brazilian peppertree–associated ACD parallels that for poison ivy. As this pest increases its range, dermatologists living in endemic areas should familiarize themselves with Brazilian peppertree and its potential for harm.
Brazilian Peppertree Morphology and Geography
Plants in the Anacardiaceae family contribute to more ACD than any other family, and its 80 genera include most of the urushiol-containing plants, such as Toxicodendron (poison ivy, poison oak, poison sumac, Japanese lacquer tree), Anacardium (cashew tree), Mangifera (mango fruit), Semecarpus (India marking nut tree), and Schinus (Brazilian peppertree). Deciduous and evergreen tree members of the Anacardiaceae family grow primarily in tropical and subtropical locations and produce thick resins, 5-petalled flowers, and small fruit known as drupes. The genus name for Brazilian peppertree, Schinus, derives from Latin and Greek words meaning “mastic tree,” a relative of the pistachio tree that the Brazilian peppertree resembles.1 Brazilian peppertree leaves look and smell similar to Pistacia terebinthus (turpentine tree or terebinth), from which the species name terebinthifolia derives.2
Brazilian peppertree originated in South America, particularly Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina.3 Since the 1840s,4 it has been an invasive weed in the United States, notably in Florida, California, Hawaii, Alabama, Georgia,5 Arizona,6 Nevada,3 and Texas.5,7 The plant also grows throughout the world, including parts of Africa, Asia, Central America, Europe,6 New Zealand,8 Australia, and various islands.9 The plant expertly outcompetes neighboring plants and has prompted control and eradication efforts in many locations.3
Identifying Features and Allergenic Plant Parts
Brazilian peppertree can be either a shrub or tree up to 30 feet tall.4 As an evergreen, it retains its leaves year-round. During fruiting seasons (primarily December through March7), bright red or pink (depending on the variety3) berries appear (Figure 1A) and contribute to its nickname “Florida holly.” Although generally considered an unwelcome guest in Florida, it does display white flowers (Figure 1B) year-round, especially from September to November.9 It characteristically exhibits 3 to 13 leaflets per leaf.10 The leaflets’ ovoid and ridged edges, netlike vasculature, shiny hue, and aroma can help identify the plant (Figure 2A). For decades, the sap of the Brazilian peppertree has been associated with skin irritation (Figure 2B).6 Although the sap of the plant serves as the main culprit of Brazilian peppertree–associated ACD, it appears that other parts of the plant, including the fruit, can cause irritating effects to skin on contact.11,12 The leaves, trunk, and fruit can be harmful to both humans and animals.6 Chemicals from flowers and crushed fruit also can lead to irritating effects in the respiratory tract if aspirated.13


Urushiol, an oily resin present in most plants of the Anacardiaceae family,14 contains many chemicals, including allergenic phenols, catechols, and resorcinols.15 Urushiol-allergic individuals develop dermatitis upon exposure to Brazilian peppertree sap.6 Alkenyl phenols found in Brazilian peppertree lead to the cutaneous manifestations in sensitized patients.11,12 In 1983, Stahl et al11 identified a phenol, cardanol (chemical name 3-pentadecylphenol16) C15:1, in Brazilian peppertree fruit. The group further tested this compound’s effect on skin via patch testing, which showed an allergic response.11 Cashew nut shells (Anacardium occidentale) contain cardanol, anacardic acid (a phenolic acid), and cardol (a phenol with the chemical name 5-pentadecylresorcinol),15,16 though Stahl et al11 were unable to extract these 2 substances (if present) from Brazilian peppertree fruit. When exposed to cardol and anacardic acid, those allergic to poison ivy often develop ACD,15 and these 2 substances are more irritating than cardanol.11 A later study did identify cardol in addition to cardanol in Brazilian peppertree.12
Cutaneous Manifestations
Brazilian peppertree–induced ACD appears similar to other plant-induced ACD with linear streaks of erythema, juicy papules, vesicles, coalescing erythematous plaques, and/or occasional edema and bullae accompanied by intense pruritus.
Treatment
Avoiding contact with Brazilian peppertree is the first line of defense, and treatment for a reaction associated with exposure is similar to that of poison ivy.17 Application of cool compresses, calamine lotion, and topical astringents offer symptom alleviation, and topical steroids (eg, clobetasol propionate 0.05% twice daily) can improve mild localized ACD when given prior to formation of blisters. For more severe and diffuse ACD, oral steroids (eg, prednisone 1 mg/kg/d tapered over 2–3 weeks) likely are necessary, though intramuscular options greatly alleviate discomfort in more severe cases (eg, intramuscular triamcinolone acetonide 1 mg/kg combined with betamethasone 0.1 mg/kg). Physicians should monitor sites for any signs of superimposed bacterial infection and initiate antibiotics as necessary.17
Brazilian peppertree (Schinus terebinthifolia), a member of the Anacardiaceae family, is an internationally invasive plant that causes allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in susceptible individuals. This noxious weed has settled into the landscape of the southern United States and continues to expand. Its key identifying features include its year-round white flowers as well as a peppery and turpentinelike aroma created by cracking its bright red berries. The ACD associated with contact—primarily with the plant’s sap—stems from known alkenyl phenols, cardol and cardanol. Treatment of Brazilian peppertree–associated ACD parallels that for poison ivy. As this pest increases its range, dermatologists living in endemic areas should familiarize themselves with Brazilian peppertree and its potential for harm.
Brazilian Peppertree Morphology and Geography
Plants in the Anacardiaceae family contribute to more ACD than any other family, and its 80 genera include most of the urushiol-containing plants, such as Toxicodendron (poison ivy, poison oak, poison sumac, Japanese lacquer tree), Anacardium (cashew tree), Mangifera (mango fruit), Semecarpus (India marking nut tree), and Schinus (Brazilian peppertree). Deciduous and evergreen tree members of the Anacardiaceae family grow primarily in tropical and subtropical locations and produce thick resins, 5-petalled flowers, and small fruit known as drupes. The genus name for Brazilian peppertree, Schinus, derives from Latin and Greek words meaning “mastic tree,” a relative of the pistachio tree that the Brazilian peppertree resembles.1 Brazilian peppertree leaves look and smell similar to Pistacia terebinthus (turpentine tree or terebinth), from which the species name terebinthifolia derives.2
Brazilian peppertree originated in South America, particularly Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina.3 Since the 1840s,4 it has been an invasive weed in the United States, notably in Florida, California, Hawaii, Alabama, Georgia,5 Arizona,6 Nevada,3 and Texas.5,7 The plant also grows throughout the world, including parts of Africa, Asia, Central America, Europe,6 New Zealand,8 Australia, and various islands.9 The plant expertly outcompetes neighboring plants and has prompted control and eradication efforts in many locations.3
Identifying Features and Allergenic Plant Parts
Brazilian peppertree can be either a shrub or tree up to 30 feet tall.4 As an evergreen, it retains its leaves year-round. During fruiting seasons (primarily December through March7), bright red or pink (depending on the variety3) berries appear (Figure 1A) and contribute to its nickname “Florida holly.” Although generally considered an unwelcome guest in Florida, it does display white flowers (Figure 1B) year-round, especially from September to November.9 It characteristically exhibits 3 to 13 leaflets per leaf.10 The leaflets’ ovoid and ridged edges, netlike vasculature, shiny hue, and aroma can help identify the plant (Figure 2A). For decades, the sap of the Brazilian peppertree has been associated with skin irritation (Figure 2B).6 Although the sap of the plant serves as the main culprit of Brazilian peppertree–associated ACD, it appears that other parts of the plant, including the fruit, can cause irritating effects to skin on contact.11,12 The leaves, trunk, and fruit can be harmful to both humans and animals.6 Chemicals from flowers and crushed fruit also can lead to irritating effects in the respiratory tract if aspirated.13


Urushiol, an oily resin present in most plants of the Anacardiaceae family,14 contains many chemicals, including allergenic phenols, catechols, and resorcinols.15 Urushiol-allergic individuals develop dermatitis upon exposure to Brazilian peppertree sap.6 Alkenyl phenols found in Brazilian peppertree lead to the cutaneous manifestations in sensitized patients.11,12 In 1983, Stahl et al11 identified a phenol, cardanol (chemical name 3-pentadecylphenol16) C15:1, in Brazilian peppertree fruit. The group further tested this compound’s effect on skin via patch testing, which showed an allergic response.11 Cashew nut shells (Anacardium occidentale) contain cardanol, anacardic acid (a phenolic acid), and cardol (a phenol with the chemical name 5-pentadecylresorcinol),15,16 though Stahl et al11 were unable to extract these 2 substances (if present) from Brazilian peppertree fruit. When exposed to cardol and anacardic acid, those allergic to poison ivy often develop ACD,15 and these 2 substances are more irritating than cardanol.11 A later study did identify cardol in addition to cardanol in Brazilian peppertree.12
Cutaneous Manifestations
Brazilian peppertree–induced ACD appears similar to other plant-induced ACD with linear streaks of erythema, juicy papules, vesicles, coalescing erythematous plaques, and/or occasional edema and bullae accompanied by intense pruritus.
Treatment
Avoiding contact with Brazilian peppertree is the first line of defense, and treatment for a reaction associated with exposure is similar to that of poison ivy.17 Application of cool compresses, calamine lotion, and topical astringents offer symptom alleviation, and topical steroids (eg, clobetasol propionate 0.05% twice daily) can improve mild localized ACD when given prior to formation of blisters. For more severe and diffuse ACD, oral steroids (eg, prednisone 1 mg/kg/d tapered over 2–3 weeks) likely are necessary, though intramuscular options greatly alleviate discomfort in more severe cases (eg, intramuscular triamcinolone acetonide 1 mg/kg combined with betamethasone 0.1 mg/kg). Physicians should monitor sites for any signs of superimposed bacterial infection and initiate antibiotics as necessary.17
- Zona S. The correct gender of Schinus (Anacardiaceae). Phytotaxa. 2015;222:075-077.
- Terebinth. Encyclopedia.com website. Updated May 17, 2018. Accessed July 9, 2024. https://www.encyclopedia.com/plants-and-animals/plants/plants/terebinth
- Brazilian pepper tree. iNaturalist website. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://www.inaturalist.org/guide_taxa/841531#:~:text=Throughout% 20South%20and%20Central%20America,and%20as%20a%20topical%20antiseptic
- Center for Aquatic and Invasive Plants. Schinus terebinthifolia. Brazilian peppertree. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://plants.ifas.ufl.edu/plant-directory/schinus-terebinthifolia/#:~:text=Species%20Overview&text=People%20sensitive%20to%20poison%20ivy,associated%20with%20its%20bloom%20period
- Brazilian peppertree (Schinus terebinthifolia). Early Detection & Distribution Mapping System. Accessed July 4, 2024. https://www.eddmaps.org/distribution/usstate.cfm?sub=78819
- Morton F. Brazilian pepper: its impact on people, animals, and the environment. Econ Bot. 1978;32:353-359.
- Fire Effects Information System. Schinus terebinthifolius. US Department of Agriculture website. Accessed July 4, 2024. https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/shrub/schter/all.html
- New Zealand Plant Conservation Network. Schinus terebinthifolius. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://www.nzpcn.org.nz/flora/species/schinus-terebinthifolius
- Rojas-Sandoval J, Acevedo-Rodriguez P. Schinus terebinthifolius (Brazilian pepper tree). CABI Compendium. July 23, 2014. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/10.1079/cabicompendium.49031
- Patocka J, Diz de Almeida J. Brazilian peppertree: review of pharmacology. Mil Med Sci Lett. 2017;86:32-41.
- Stahl E, Keller K, Blinn C. Cardanol, a skin irritant in pink pepper. Plant Medica. 1983;48:5-9.
- Skopp G, Opferkuch H-J, Schqenker G. n-Alkylphenols from Schinus terebinthifolius Raddi (Anacardiaceae). In German. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung C. 1987;42:1-16. https://doi.org/10.1515/znc-1987-1-203.
- Lloyd HA, Jaouni TM, Evans SL, et al. Terpenes of Schinus terebinthifolius. Phytochemistry. 1977;16:1301-1302.
- Goon ATJ, Goh CL. Plant dermatitis: Asian perspective. Indian J Dermatol. 2011;56:707-710.
- Rozas-Muñoz E, Lepoittevin JP, Pujol RM, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis to plants: understanding the chemistry will help our diagnostic approach. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2012;103:456-477.
- Caillol S. Cardanol: a promising building block for biobased polymers and additives. Curr Opin Green Sustain Chem. 2018;14: 26-32.
- Prok L, McGovern T. Poison ivy (Toxicodendron) dermatitis. UpToDate. Updated June 21, 2024. Accessed July 7, 2024. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/poison-ivy-toxicodendron-dermatitis#
- Zona S. The correct gender of Schinus (Anacardiaceae). Phytotaxa. 2015;222:075-077.
- Terebinth. Encyclopedia.com website. Updated May 17, 2018. Accessed July 9, 2024. https://www.encyclopedia.com/plants-and-animals/plants/plants/terebinth
- Brazilian pepper tree. iNaturalist website. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://www.inaturalist.org/guide_taxa/841531#:~:text=Throughout% 20South%20and%20Central%20America,and%20as%20a%20topical%20antiseptic
- Center for Aquatic and Invasive Plants. Schinus terebinthifolia. Brazilian peppertree. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://plants.ifas.ufl.edu/plant-directory/schinus-terebinthifolia/#:~:text=Species%20Overview&text=People%20sensitive%20to%20poison%20ivy,associated%20with%20its%20bloom%20period
- Brazilian peppertree (Schinus terebinthifolia). Early Detection & Distribution Mapping System. Accessed July 4, 2024. https://www.eddmaps.org/distribution/usstate.cfm?sub=78819
- Morton F. Brazilian pepper: its impact on people, animals, and the environment. Econ Bot. 1978;32:353-359.
- Fire Effects Information System. Schinus terebinthifolius. US Department of Agriculture website. Accessed July 4, 2024. https://www.fs.usda.gov/database/feis/plants/shrub/schter/all.html
- New Zealand Plant Conservation Network. Schinus terebinthifolius. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://www.nzpcn.org.nz/flora/species/schinus-terebinthifolius
- Rojas-Sandoval J, Acevedo-Rodriguez P. Schinus terebinthifolius (Brazilian pepper tree). CABI Compendium. July 23, 2014. Accessed July 1, 2024. https://www.cabidigitallibrary.org/doi/10.1079/cabicompendium.49031
- Patocka J, Diz de Almeida J. Brazilian peppertree: review of pharmacology. Mil Med Sci Lett. 2017;86:32-41.
- Stahl E, Keller K, Blinn C. Cardanol, a skin irritant in pink pepper. Plant Medica. 1983;48:5-9.
- Skopp G, Opferkuch H-J, Schqenker G. n-Alkylphenols from Schinus terebinthifolius Raddi (Anacardiaceae). In German. Zeitschrift für Naturforschung C. 1987;42:1-16. https://doi.org/10.1515/znc-1987-1-203.
- Lloyd HA, Jaouni TM, Evans SL, et al. Terpenes of Schinus terebinthifolius. Phytochemistry. 1977;16:1301-1302.
- Goon ATJ, Goh CL. Plant dermatitis: Asian perspective. Indian J Dermatol. 2011;56:707-710.
- Rozas-Muñoz E, Lepoittevin JP, Pujol RM, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis to plants: understanding the chemistry will help our diagnostic approach. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2012;103:456-477.
- Caillol S. Cardanol: a promising building block for biobased polymers and additives. Curr Opin Green Sustain Chem. 2018;14: 26-32.
- Prok L, McGovern T. Poison ivy (Toxicodendron) dermatitis. UpToDate. Updated June 21, 2024. Accessed July 7, 2024. https://www.uptodate.com/contents/poison-ivy-toxicodendron-dermatitis#
Practice Points
- The Anacardiaceae family contains several plants, including Brazilian peppertree and poison ivy, that have the potential to cause allergic contact dermatitis (ACD).
- Hot spots for Brazilian peppertree include Florida and California, though it also has been reported in Texas, Hawaii, Georgia, Alabama, Arkansas, Nevada, and Arizona.
- Alkenyl phenols (eg, cardol, cardanol) are the key sensitizers found in Brazilian peppertree.
- Treatment consists of supportive care and either topical, oral, or intramuscular steroids depending on the extent and severity of the ACD.