IADVL
Indexed with PubMed and Science Citation Index (E) 
 
Users online: 1738 
     Home | Feedback | Login 
About Current Issue Archive Ahead of print Search Instructions Online Submission Subscribe What's New Contact  
  Navigate here 
  Search
 
   Next article
   Previous article 
   Table of Contents
  
 Resource links
   Similar in PUBMED
    Search Pubmed for
    Search in Google Scholar for
  Related articles
   [PDF Not available] *
   Citation Manager
   Access Statistics
   Reader Comments
   Email Alert *
   Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
   Abstract
   Introduction
   Materials and Me...
   Results
   Discussion
   References
   Article Tables

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed4125    
    Printed69    
    Emailed3    
    PDF Downloaded0    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal

 


 
STUDIES
Year : 1996  |  Volume : 62  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 210-212

Clinicomicrobiological aspects of tinea cruris in madras




Correspondence Address:
Mahendra S Raja


Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


PMID: 20948056

Rights and PermissionsRights and Permissions

  Abstract 

A total of 242 patients with clinically diagnosed tinea cruris were screened and 181 (74.7 %) were found to be positive in culture for dermatophytes. 93.9% of infections were caused by Trichophyton spp., of which 58.4% were Trichophyton rubrum, 5.5% were Epidermophyton floccosum, 3.8% were Trichophyton tonsurans and we had a single isolate of Microsporum gypseum complex. Incidence of tinea cruris was higher in males (95.6%) than in females (4.4%). 45% of the cases were recurrent and 38% of cases were chronic tinea cruris. Three patients had granulomatous lesion. Zoophilic T mentagrophytes was the major aetiologic agent isolated from all the 3 cases of granulomatous tinea cruris.


Keywords: Tinea cruris, Dermatophytes


How to cite this article:
Raja MS, Menon T. Clinicomicrobiological aspects of tinea cruris in madras. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 1996;62:210-2

How to cite this URL:
Raja MS, Menon T. Clinicomicrobiological aspects of tinea cruris in madras. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol [serial online] 1996 [cited 2019 Sep 15];62:210-2. Available from: http://www.ijdvl.com/text.asp?1996/62/4/210/4393



  Introduction Top


Dermatophytes are the major agents of superficial mycoses of man and remain a general public health problem.[1][2][3] Tinea cruris, one of the major dermatophyte infections in groin and perianal region is found in all parts of the world. It is more prevalent in tropics, and may reach epidemic proportions in areas where high rate of humidity, over population and poor hygienic conditions are prevalent.[2]

This paper reports the clinicomicrobiological aspects of tinea cruris in Madras.


  Materials and Methods Top


242 patients with clinically diagnosed tinea cruris attending dermatology department, Madras Medical College, Madras were screened from March,1993 to March, 1996. Skin scrapings were taken from the active margin of the lesion and were cultured onto Sabouraud's dextrose agar slants and kept for incubation at room tempertature for 21 days.

The positive culture was further identified by colony morphology and microscopic characters using standard procedures.[4]


  Results Top


181/242 (74.7%) of patients were positive in culture for dermatophytes. Out of 181 patients studied, 173 (95.6%) were males and 8 (4.4%) were females. 179 patients were from very low income group (daily wage labourers, porters and scavengers etc). The incidence of tinea cruris was found to be highest in patients between 20-45 years (67.9%) whereas it was very low in children below 10 years and in people above 60 years [Table - 1]

Trichophyton rubrum was the most common species isolated (58%). T rubrum was more frequently isolated from recurrent and chronic tinea cruris in our study [Table - 2].

Granulomatous lesions were recorded in 3 patients, all of them were diabetics. Trichophyton mentagrophytes (granular type) was isolated from all these cases. Atopy was the common condition associated with tinea cruris (35.9%), followed by diabetes (14.4%) [Table - 3].


  Discussion Top


The present study in Madras reveals that tinea cruris was more common in males (95.6%), whereas the incidence was very low in females (4.4%). Similar findings were recorded by previous workers.[1],[2],[5],[6]

Trichophyton rubrum, an obligate anthropophilic dermatophyte was the most common pathogen isolated from the infection (58.4%).

The predominance of Trichophyton rubrum was reported in New Zealand,[7] Italy[8] and in poland.[9] But it was reported to be less common in Kuwait[10] and in Portugal.[11] Previous reports from India were similar to our observation.[5],[6],[12],[13]

Trichophyton mentagrophytes (granular type) was isolated in about 14.7% of patients. Trichophyton mentagrophytes (granular type) is predominant in animals, but infection has also been reported from human ringworm.[14] In our study we had three cases of granulomatous lesion and all of them were diabetic patients.

In our present study, we have isolated 7 strains of Trichophyton tonsurans. This species is known to cause infection of the scalp throughout the world.[15] 5/26 patients had diabetes mellitus and perhaps this could have contributed to the high incidence of Trichophyton tonsurans in these patients. Hay has reported that diabetics is a predisposing factor in the development of dermatophytosis.[16]

The other non-anthropophilic dermatophyte isolated in this study was a single isolate of Microsporum gypseum complex, which is a rare isolate form human ringworm.



 
  References Top

1.Emmons CW, Binford CH, Utz JP, Kwon-chung. Medical mycology. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger, 1977:177.  Back to cited text no. 1    
2.Rippon JW. The pathogenic fungi and the pathogenic actinomycetes. Philadelphia: Saunders, 1982:154.  Back to cited text no. 2    
3.Venugopal PV, Venugopal TV. Antimycotic susceptibility testing of dermatophytes. Ind J Med Microbiol 1993;11:151-4.  Back to cited text no. 3    
4.Davise HL. Medically important fungi - a guide to identification. Hagerstown: Harper & Row, 1976:1.  Back to cited text no. 4    
5.Padhye AA, Thirumalachar MJ. Dermatophytosis in Poona, India. Observation on incidence, clinical features, environmental factors and causal agents studied during 1958 to 1963 at Sasson Hospitals, Poona. Mycopath Mycol Appl 1970;40:225-40.  Back to cited text no. 5    
6.Das gupta SN, Shome SK. Studies in medical mycology on the occurrence of mycotic diseases in Lucknow. Mycopath Mycol Appl 1958;19:177-86.  Back to cited text no. 6    
7.Allred BJ. Dermatophyte prevalence in Wellingon, New Zealand. Sabouraudia 1982;20:75-9.  Back to cited text no. 7    
8.Todaro F, Germano D, Criseo G. An outbreak of tinea pedis and tinea cruris in tyre factory in Messina, Italy. Mycopathologia 1983;83:27-31.  Back to cited text no. 8    
9.Henryk P. Mycological flora isolated from people in Poland. Mycopath Mycol Appl 1970;40:65-7.  Back to cited text no. 9    
10.Karaouli R.Selim M, Mousa A. Incidence of dermatophytosis in Kuwait. Sabouraudia 1979;17:131-4.  Back to cited text no. 10    
11.Hermano N. Mycological study of 519 cases of ringworm infections in Portugal. Mycopath Mycol Appl 1960;13:121-5.  Back to cited text no. 11    
12.Verenkar MP, Pinto MJW, Rodriguress, et al. Clinico-microbiological study of dermatophytoses. Ind J Pathol Microbiol 1-991;34:186-92.  Back to cited text no. 12    
13.Gupta BK,Kumar S, Rajkumar, et al. Mycological aspects of dermatomycosis in Ludhiana. Ind J Pathol Microbiol 1993;36:233-7.  Back to cited text no. 13    
14.Harold LS, Blank F. Tinea corporis caused by Trichophyton mentagrophytes var granulosum. Mycopath Mycol Appl 1967;31:267-9.  Back to cited text no. 14    
15.Rippon JW. Forty four years of dermatophytes in a Chicago clinic (1944-1988) Mycopathologia 1992;119:25-8.  Back to cited text no. 15    
16.Hay RJ. Chronic dermatophyte infections. I. Clinical and mycological features. Br J Dermatol 1982;106, 1-9.  Back to cited text no. 16    


    Tables

[Table - 1], [Table - 2], [Table - 3]



 

Top
Print this article  Email this article
Previous article Next article

    

Online since 15th March '04
Published by Wolters Kluwer - Medknow