Hansen's Disease in Penang: A 10-year Retrospective Analysis
- Author:
Tan WC
;
Lo Kang SC
;
Ong CK
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Epidemiology, leprosy, lepra reactions
- From:Malaysian Journal of Dermatology
2007;19(-):89-94
- CountryMalaysia
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
Background Leprosy is a chronic granulomatous infection caused by Mycobacterium leprae. The principal manifestations are skin lesions and
peripheral neuropathy. The aims of the study is to improve the understanding of leprosy cases managed in Penang General Hospital and to analyse the demographics, clinical patterns, treatment regimen and outcome of leprosy in Penang Hospital.
Materials and Methods This retrospective study covered a 10-year period from 1997 to 2006. Demographic characteristics, clinical patterns, treatment regimen of leprosy and outcome were analysed.
Results A total of 95 patients were diagnosed to have leprosy (prevalence rate of 0.68 per 100,000). The mean age at presentation was 40.4 years ± 17.9 (range from 3 to 91 years old). There were 35 Malays (36.8%), 34 Chinese (35.8%), 5 Indians (5.2%) and 21 others.
Patients experienced symptoms for a mean of 21.4 months before being referred to our clinic. Only 29 patients (30.5%) had a family history of leprosy. 34 patients (35.8%) presented with lepromatous leprosy. 95
patients (100%) presented with skin lesions, 61 patients (61.2%) with nerve lesions, 17 patients (17.9%) with deformities and 12 (12.6%) with reactions. The skin lesions occurred predominantly over the lower
limbs, face and trunk. 95.8% of skin lesions were hypo/anaesthetic. Common thickened nerves observed were ulnar nerve (40.0%), great auricular nerve (38.9%) and posterior tibialis nerve (25.3%). The lepra
reaction rate was 51.6%. Type 1 reaction commonly involved those with borderline spectrum but type 2 reaction commonly involved those with lepromatous spectrum. Common side effects observed with MDT were dapsone induced hemolytic anaemia (10.5%), cutaneous adverse
drug reaction (8.4%) and drug induced hepatitis (2.1%). None of them experienced severe drug toxicity. In terms of treatment for leprosy, 71.6% of patients had completed their treatment and 18.9% were still on treatment. 24.1% of patients had their regimen changed because of
side effects and drug resistance. 6 patients died (due to unrelated cause) and another 3 patients defaulted treatment.
Conclusions Our study showed similar epidemiological findings as other studies except for a higher reaction rate. There was a significant delay in diagnosis in our cohort. Identification of the reasons of delay
in diagnosis, and the risk factors of lepra reaction are important in the management of leprosy. Anti-leprotic treatment is relatively safe and effective in treating leprosy.
