Propionibacterium/Cutibacterium species-related positive samples, identification, clinical and resistance features: a 10-year survey in a French hospital.

A 10-year retrospective study of Propionibacterium/Cutibacterium-positive samples gathered from hospitalized patients was conducted at Nantes University hospital. A total of 2728 Propionibacterium/Cutibacterium-positive samples analyzed between 2007 and 2016 were included. Due to the implementation of MALDI-TOF identification in 2013, most non-Cutibacterium acnes isolates were identified a second time using this technology. Over that period, Cutibacterium acnes remained the most predominant species accounting for 91.5% (2497/2728) of the isolates, followed by Cutibacterium avidum (4.2%, 115/2728) and Cutibacterium granulosum (2.4%, 64/2728). Regarding the origin of samples, the orthopaedic department was the main Cutibacterium sample provider representing 51.9% (1415/2728) of all samples followed by the dermatology department (11.5%, 315/2728). Samples were recovered from various tissue locations: 31.5% (858/2728) from surgery-related samples such as shoulder, spine or hip replacement devices and 19.1% (520/2728) from skin samples. MALDI-TOF method revealed misidentification before 2013. Cutibacterium avidum was falsely identified as C. granulosum (n = 33). Consequently, MALDI-TOF technology using up-to-date databases should be preferred to biochemical identification in order to avoid biased species identification. Regarding antibiotic resistance, 14.7% (20/136) of C. acnes was resistant to erythromycin. 4.1% (41/1005) of C. acnes strains, 17.9% (12/67) of C. avidum strains and 3.6% (1/28) of C. granulosum strains were found resistant to clindamycin.

Management of granulomatous foreign body reaction to fillers with methotrexate.

BACKGROUND: Granulomatous foreign body reactions (GFBR) have been reported after injection with almost every soft tissue fillers, more commonly with non-biodegradable ones. Such granulomatosis is rare but can cause significant discomfort owing to their aesthetic and functional repercussions. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether immunomodulation with low doses of methotrexate is effective in the treatment of GFBR to filler material. METHODS: Clinical case series of four patients with severe, treatment-resistant GFBR to non-biodegradable fillers in the Department of Dermatology of Bordeaux University Hospital, Bordeaux, France, successfully treated with oral or subcutaneous methotrexate, 10-15 mg weekly during 6 months. Adverse events were monitored throughout the treatment once weekly the first month then once monthly the remaining 5 months. RESULTS: Four women with a mean age of 73.7 years (66-85 years) and nodularity of the face were included and treated up to 6 months. Histological findings were consistent with GFBR to liquid injectable silicone in 2 cases, polymethylmethacrylate in 1 case and hydroxyethylmethacrylate in the last case. The delay after injection of the filler material was from 17 to 30 years. In one patient, inflammatory lesions followed dental care. After 6 months of treatment with 10-15 mg once weekly, all patients were cleared. Three patients developed a mild hepatic cytolysis (grade 1 or 2). Methotrexate could be maintained in those 3 cases and was discontinuated after 6 months in all cases. Two patients developed recurrence of lesions, 28 and 9 months, respectively, after treatment stops, requiring reintroduction of treatment. The two other patients remained cleared after 6 months of follow-up. CONCLUSION: Low doses of methotrexate appear to offer a low-risk therapeutic alternative in resistant and severe GFBR to fillers. A prospective study with long-term follow-up is required to confirm these preliminary observations.