Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A review of antibiotics in dermatology

  • Review
  • Published:
Journal of Cutaneous Medicine and Surgery: Incorporating Medical and Surgical Dermatology

Abstract

Background

Since the early 1930s when antibiotics were first introduced, they have revolutionized the way physicians treat infections. Skin conditions from acne to leprosy, which were once shunned by society, are now easily treated with oral antibiotics.

Objective

Antibiotics are chemicals derived from bacteria and fungi that uniquely have antibacterial action. The most notable example is penicillin, which is derived from a mold. With hundreds of antibiotics available to the practicing physician, improper use of these drugs has become widespread and expensive and has spawned resistant strains. For the dermatologist, antibiotics are vital weapons in the drug armamentarium for treating various skin conditions.

Conclusion

This review explores the newest and most common oral, parenteral, and topical antibiotics used in dermatology, their indications, adverse effects, dosage, and spectrum of activity. Furthermore, systemic antibacterial prophylaxis and vaccines pertinent to dermatology are discussed. The penicillins, cephalosporins, tetracyclines, macrolides, fluoroquinolones, sulfonamides, aminoglycosides, lincosamides, folate inhibitors, and a new synthetic class of drugs, the oxazolidinones, are reviewed. These antibiotics are used to treat a variety of organisms.

Sommaire

Antécédents

Depuis leur mise au point au debut des années 1930, les antibiotiques n’ont cessé de révolutionner le traitement des infections. Des dermatoses autrefois fuies par la société, de l’acné à lèpre, sont facilement traitées aujourd’hui grâce aux antibiotiques par voie orale.

Objectif

Les antibiotiques sont des produits chimiques dérivés de bactéries et de champignons, particulièrement efficaces contre les infections bactériennes. L’exemple le plus connu est la pénicilline qui provient d’une moisissure. La prolifération des antibiotiques, dont le nombre sur le marché dépasse la centaine, en a entraîné un usage abusif, augmentant les coûts associes aux soins médicaux et causant l’apparition de souches résistantes. Toutefois, pour le dermatologue, les antibiotiques constituent un élément essentiel de la pharmacopée utilisée dans le traitement des diverses affections cutanées.

Conclusion

Le présent article explore les plus récents antibiotiques oraux, parentéraux et topiques les plus fréquemment utilisés en dermatologie. On y aborde la posologie, les réactions indésirables, les doses et le spectre d’activité. De plus, on y discute des prophylaxies systémiques antibactériennes et des vaccins reliés à la dermatologie. On passera en revue la pénicilline, la céphalosporine, la tétracycline, les macrolides, les fluoroquinolones, les sulfamides, les aminosides, les lincosamides, les antifoliques ainsi qu’une nouvelle classe de médicaments synthétiques, les oxazolidinones. Ces antibiotiques sont utilisés dans le traitement d’une variété d’organismes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Kazung BG, Bertram J. Basic and Clinical Pharmacology. In: Norwalk, CT: Appleton & Lang, pp 43-50

  2. Hirschmann JV. Overview of antibiotics. In: Freedberg IM, Eisen AZ, Wolff K, et al, eds. Fitzpatrick’s Dermatology in General Medicine, 5th ed. New York: Mc Graw-Hill, pp 2829-2837

  3. Kujath P et al. (2000) University of Lubeck, Germany; European Congress of Chemotherapy, Madrid, Spain, May 9, 2000

  4. Roujeau JC, Stern RS. Severe adverse cutaneous reactions to drugs. N Engl J Med 1994; 331(19): 1272–1285

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Korkij W, Soltani K. Fixed drug eruption. A brief review. Arch Dermatol 1984; 120:520–524

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Somer T, Finegold SM. Vasculitides associated with infections, immunizations, and antimicrobial drugs. Clin Infect Dis 1995; 20:1010–1036

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ruocco V, Sacerdoti G. Pemphigus and bullous pemphigoid due to drugs. Int J Dermatol 1991; 30(5):307–312

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Roujeau JC, Bioulac-Sage P, Bourseau C, et al. Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis. Analysis of 63 cases. Arch Dermatol 1991; 127:1333–1338

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lin RY. A perspective on penicillin allergy. Arch Intern Med 1991; 152(5):930–937

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sher TH. Penicillin hypersensitivity—a review. Pediatr Clin North Am 1983; 30(1):161–176

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Asbel LE, Levison ME. Cephalosporins, carbapenems and monobactams. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2000; 14(2):435–447

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gilbert DN, Moellering RC, Sande MA (1999) The Sanford Guide to Antimicrobial Therapy, pp 35–39

  13. Dattwyler RJ, Halper JJ, Volkman DJ, et al. Treatment of late Lyme borreliosis—randomized comparison of ceftriaxone and penicillin. Lancet 1998; 1(8596):1191–1194

    Google Scholar 

  14. Saxton A, Beal GN, Rohr AS, et al. Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to beta-lactamantibiotics. Ann Intern Med 1987; 107(2): 204–215

    Google Scholar 

  15. Platt R, Dreis MW, Kennedy DL, et al. Serum sickness-like reactions to amoxicillin, cefaclor, cephalexin, and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole. J Infect Dis 1988; 158:474–477

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bachelez H, Senet P, Cadranel J, et al. The use of tetracycline for the treatment of sarcoidosis. Arch Dermatol 2001; 137:69–73

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Webster GF. Acne. Curr Probl Dermatol 1996; 8:237–241

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Del Rosso J (2000) Meeting highlights, Acne and rosacea, 24th Annual Hawaii Dermatology Seminar, p 3 (Published by an unrestricted educational grant from Galderma)

  19. Zuckerman JM. The newer macrolides, azithromycin and clarithromycin. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2000; 14(2):449–462

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Sturgill MG, Rapp RP. Clarithromycin: Review of a new macrolide antibiotic with improved microbiologic spectum and favorable pharmaco kinetic and adverse effect profiles. Ann Pharmacother 1992; 26(9):1099–1108

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kanatani MS, Guglielmo BJ. The new macrolides: azithromycin and clarithromycin. West J Med 1994; 160(1):31–37

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Sharma PK, Yadav TP, Gautam RK, et al. Erythromycin in pityriasis rosea: A double blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial. J Am Acad Dermatol 2000; 42:241–244

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Strle F, Maraspin V, Lotric-Furlan S, et al. Azithromycin and doxycycline for the treatment of Borreliaculture-positive erythema migrans. Infection 1996; 24(1):64–68

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Dattwylen RJ, Grunwaldt E, Luft BJ. Clarithromycin in the treatment of early Lyme disease: a pilot study. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996; 40(2):468–469

    Google Scholar 

  25. Lassus A. Comparative studies of azithromycin in skin and soft tissue infections and sexually transmitted infections byNeisseria andChlamydia species. J Antimicrob Chemother 1990; 25(Suppl A): 115–121

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Hardy DJ, Guay DRP, Jones RN. Clarithromycin, a unique macrolide: A pharmacokinetic, microbiological and clinical overview. Diagn Microbiol Infect Dis 1992; 15(1):39–53

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mallory SB. Azithromycin compared with cephalexin in the treatment of skin and skin structure infections. Am J Med 1991; 91(3A):36S-39S

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Handsfield HH, Dalu ZA, Martin DH, et al. Multicenter trial of single-dose azithromycin vs ceftriaxone in the treatment of uncomplicated gonorrhea. Sex Transm Dis 1994; 21(2): 107–111

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Lesher GT, Froelich EJ, Gruett JH, et al. 1,8-naphthyridine derivatives: a new class of chemotherapy agents. J Med Pharm Chem 1962; 5:1063–1067

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Chu DT, Fernandes PB. Structure-activity relationship of thefluoroquinolones. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1989; 33(2): 131–135

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Domagala JM. Structure-activity and structure-side effect relationships of the quinolone antibacterials. J Antimicrob Chemother 1994; 33(4):685–706

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Walker RC. The fluoroquinolones. Mayo Clin Proc 1999; 74: 1030–1034

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. O’Donnell JA, Gelone SP. Fluoroquinolones. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2000; 14(2):489–513

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Rodvold KA. Clinical safety profile of newer fluoroquinolones. Infect Med 1999; 10(Supp):41–43

    Google Scholar 

  35. Klempner MS, Styrt B. Prevention of recurrent staphylococcal skin infections with low-dose clindamycin therapy. JAMA 1988; 260(18):2682–2685

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Zalla MJ, Su WP, Fransway AF. Dermatologic manifestations of human immunodeficiency virus infection. Mayo Clin Proc 1992; 67(11):1089–1108

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Purohit SD, Supta ML, Gupia PR. Dietary constituents and rifampicin absorption. Tuberculosis 1987; 68:151

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Ramesh V, Misra RS, Saxena V, et al. A comparative of efficacy of drug regimens in skin tuberculosis. Clin Exp Dermatol 1991; 16:106–109

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Hoss DM, Feder HM. Addition of rifampicin to conventional therapy for recurrent furunculosis. Arch Dermatol 1995; 131:647–648

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Gamea AM, El-Tatawi FA. The effect of rifampicin on rhinoscleroma. J Laryngol Otol 1990; 10:772–777

    Google Scholar 

  41. Grosset J, Leventis S. Adverse effects of rifampin. Rev Infect Dis 1983; 5(3S):440–446

    Google Scholar 

  42. Esterly NB, Furey NL, Flanagan LE. The effect of antimicrobial agents on leukocytechemotaxis. J Invest Dermatol 1978; 70(1):51–55

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Metronidazole (topical). In: Drug Information for the Health Care Professionals (USP DI). Rockville, MD: U.S. Pharmacopeial Convention, 1997, pp 2028–2029

  44. Wolf JE (2000) Meeting highlights, Acne and rosacea, 24th Annual Hawaii Dermatology Seminar, p 1 (Published by an unrestricted educational grant from Galderma)

  45. Hirschmann JV. Overview of antibiotics. In: Freedberg IM, Eisen AZ, Wolff K, et al, eds. Fitzpatrick’s Dermatology in General Medicine, 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp 2306-2318

  46. Hirschmann JV. Overview of antibiotics. In: Freedberg IM, Eisen AZ, Wolff K, et al, eds. Fitzpatrick’s Dermatology in General Medicine, 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp 2790-2794

  47. Ford C, Hamel J, Stapert D. Oxazolidinones: A new class of antimicrobials. Infect Med 1999; 16:435

    Google Scholar 

  48. Tucker JA, Allwine DA, Grega KC, et al. Piperazinyl oxazolidinones antibacterial agents containing apyridine, diazine or triazene hetero aromatic ring. J Med Chem. 1998; 41:3727–3735

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Dresser LD, Rybak MJ. The pharmacologic and bacteriologic properties of oxazolidinones, a new class of synthetic antimicrobials. Pharmacotherapy 1998; 18(3):456–462

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Rybak MJ, Capelletty DM, Moldovan T, et al. Comparative in vitro activities and postantibiotic effects ofthe oxazolidinones compounds eperezolid (PNU-100592) and linezolid(PNU-100766) versus vancomycin againstStaphylococcus aureus, coagulase negative staphylococci,Enterococcus faecalis, andEnterococcus faecium. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1998; 42(3):721–724

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Zurenko GE, Yagi BH, Schaadt RD, et al. In vitro activities of PNU 100592 and PNU 100766, noveloxazolidinones antibacterial agents. Antimicrob Agents Chemother 1996; 40(4):839–845

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Anonymous. Linezolid (Zyvox). Med Lett 2000; 14(1079):45-46

  53. Lundstrom TS, Sobel JD. Antibiotics for gram-positive bacterial infections. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2000; 14(2):463–474

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Chant C, Rybak MJ. Quinupristin/dalfopristin (RP 59500): a new streptograminantibiotic. Ann Pharmacother 1995; 29(10):1022–1027

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Qadri SM, Ueno Y, Abu Mostafa FM, et al. In vitro activity of quinupristin/dalfopristin, RP 59500, against gram positive clinical isolates. Chemotherapy 1997; 43(2):94–99

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Kaye ET. Topical antibacterial agents. Infect Dis Clin North Am 2000; 14(2):321–340

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Thiboutot DM. Acne: An overview of clinical research findings. Dermatol Clin 1997; 15:97–109

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Bonner MW, Benson PM, James WD. Topical antibiotics in dermatology. In: Freedberg IM, Eisen AZ, Wolff K, et al. eds. Fitzpatrick’s Dermatology in General Medicine, 5th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp 2829-2837

  59. Bradley SF. Effectiveness of mupirocin in the control of methicillin-resistantStaphylococcus aureus. Infect Med 1993; 10:23–28

    Google Scholar 

  60. Winston LG. Rifampin as antibiotic adjunct works well for recurrentboils. Skin Allergy News 2000; 31(7):25

    Google Scholar 

  61. Williams RE, Mackie RM. The staphylococci. Importance of their control in the management of skin disease. Dermatol Clin 1993; 11:201–206

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Smack OP. Infections and allergy incidence in ambulatory surgery patientsusing white petrolatum versus bacitracin ointment. JAMA 1996; 276:972–975

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Kapusnik-Uner JE. Tetracycline, chloramphenicol, erythromycin, and miscellaneous antibacterial agents. In: Hardman JG, et al, ed. Goodman and Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis of Therapeutics, 9th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp 1123-1147

  64. Lindemayr H, Drobil M. Eczema of the lower leg and contact allergy. Hautarzt 1985; 36(4):227–231

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Fraki JE, Peltonen L, Hopsu-Havu VK. Allergy to various components of topical preparations in stasisdermatitis and leg ulcer. Contact Dermatitis 1985; 5:97–100

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Klein JO. Otitis externa, otitis media, and mastoiditis. In: Mandell GL, Douglas RGL, Bennett JE eds. Principles and practice of infectious disease. New York: Churchill Livingstone, pp 505

  67. Chambers HF, Sande MA. The aminoglycosides. In: Hardman JG, et al, ed. Goodman and Gilman’s The Pharmacological Basis ofTherapeutics, 9th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, pp 1123-1147

  68. Scherbenske JM, Winton GB, James WD. AcutePseudomonas infection of the external ear (malignant external otitis). J Dermatol Surg Oncol 1998; 14:165–169

    Google Scholar 

  69. Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, Ltd. Package insert for Leshcutan (paromomycin sulfate, 15%, and methylbenzethonium chloride, 12%, ointment), Petah-Tikva, Israel

  70. Lancini G. Antibiotics, A Multidisciplinary Approach. New York, Chapter 5: Plenum, pp 70-78

  71. Edwards DI. Biosynthesis of antimicrobial drugs. In: Antimicrobial Drug Action. Baltimore, MD: University Park Press, pp 31-32

  72. Chloramphenicol (topical). In: Drug Information for Health Care Professionals (USP DI). Rockville, MD: U.S. Pharmacopeial Convention, 1997, p 795

  73. Roberts Pharmaceutical Corp. (1997) Package insert for Furacin (nitrofurazone cream). In: Physicians Desk Reference, 51st ed. Montvale, NJ: Medical Economics, p 3044

    Google Scholar 

  74. Brown CD, Zitelelli JA. A review of topical agents for wounds and methods of wounding. Guidelines for wound management. J Dermatol Surg Oncol 1993; 19:732–737

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  75. Ward RS, Saffle JR. Topical agents in burn and wound care. Phys Ther 1995; 75:526–538

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Klempner MS, Styrt B. Prevention of recurrent staphylococcal skin infections with low-dose clindamycin therapy. JAMA 1988; 260(18):2682–2685

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Meislin HW, Lerner SA, Graves MH, et al. Cutaneous abscesses: anaerobic and aerobic bacteriology andoutpatient management. Ann Intern Med 1977; 87(2):145–149

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  78. Macfie J, Harvey J. The treatment of acute superficial abscesses: A prospective clinical trial. Br J Surg 1977; 64(4):264–266

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Haas AF, Grekin RC. Antibiotic prophylaxis in dermatologic surgery. J Am Acad Dermatol 1995; 32(2 Part 1):155–176

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Dermatology, Microbiology/Immunology and Internal Medicine, University of Texas Medical Branch-Galveston, Galveston, Texas, USA

    Daniel A. Carrasco, Melody Vander Straten & Stephen K. Tyring

Authors
  1. Daniel A. Carrasco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Melody Vander Straten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Stephen K. Tyring
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephen K. Tyring.

About this article

Cite this article

Carrasco, D.A., Straten, M.V. & Tyring, S.K. A review of antibiotics in dermatology. J Cutan Med Surg 6, 128–150 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10227-001-0039-4

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10227-001-0039-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation