<<
>>

50 Erysipelas

The term erysipelas {erythros = red, pella = skin) was used in Hippocratic times (often but not always) to describe classic cellulitis. For the past century or so, however, erysipelas has commonly referred to infection of the derma with a streptococcal organ­ism, usually Streptococcus pyogenes.

Infection with a group A, beta-hemolytic streptococcus can produce a painful, red, edematous indurated skin lesion called peau d’orange for its resemblance to the texture of an orange skin. Sharp borders of the infection ex­tend rapidly, dissecting the underlying dermis from the epidermis. Erysipelas usually appears on the face, producing a butterfly rash over the cheeks and nose. The same streptococci that cause erysipelas can also cause scarlet fever, giving both diseases a fairly distinctive age pattern: Erysipelas is much more common among adults who generally escape scarlet fever, which normally attacks the young. The prognosis for untreated erysipelas is especially seri­ous when this infection is secondary to some other insult such as laryngeal infection, or puerperal sep­sis. Indeed distinctions are still made among gangre­nous erysipelas, erysipelas grave internum (a form of puerperal fever), surgical erysipelas (which occurs after a surgical procedure), and traumatic erysipelas (which begins in a wound).

History

Antiquity Through the Eighteenth Century

Early accounts of erysipelas are often confusing be­cause they lumped purulent and gangrenous afflic­tions under this rubric. Thus Hippocrates distin­guished between “traumatic” erysipelas, which accompanied wounds, and a myriad of other skin lesions that had no known external cause. Galen in turn distinguished between “phlegmon,” including suppurative ulcers and gangrene, and nonnecrotic cellulitis — but viewed both as forms of erysipelas. Celsus, in the first century A.D., considered septic ulcers, “canker,” erythematous wound infections, and Ignes Sacer to all be types of erysipelas.

Such confusion has continued into the modem pe­riod, with some historians interpreting epidemics of Ignes Sacer (sacred fire) or Saint Anthony’s fire as ergotism, whereas others have viewed these scourges as recurrent erysipelas. Before the modem period, however, physicians tended to embrace the distinc­tions made by Galen, and consequently included a wide variety of ailments including diseases of the uterus and lungs among the varieties of erysipelas.

Nineteenth Century

During the nineteenth century, physicians began giv­ing greater attention to the causes and prevalence of erysipelas because, on the one hand, the disease seemed connected to wound infection, and, on the other hand, because epidemics of erysipelas were occurring simultaneously with peak years of puer­peral sepsis, or “childbed fever.” Their investiga­tions eventually led to the discovery of streptococci and the distinctions that have provided us with our current definitions of erysipelas.

In 1795 Alexander Gordon of Aberdeen became the first clinician formally to associate erysipelas with puerperal fever (Loudon 1987). Then around the middle of the nineteenth century, two seminal studies appeared. In 1842, Oliver Wendell Holmes published an essay on the contagiousness of puer­peral fever, and in 1861 Philip Ignaz Semmelweis published his classic study of The Etiology, Concept, and Prophylaxis of Childbed Fever. Both men blamed physicians for carrying infective particles to the bed­sides of parturient women. Holmes stated specifi­cally that puerperal sepsis could be caused “by an infection originating in the matter or effluvia of erysipelas” (Carter ed. 1983). The great French clini­cian Armand Trousseau, writing during this same period, regarded even trivial skin injuries as precur­sors to erysipelas.

In 1882 following the discovery of streptococci, Frie­drich Fehleisen published a study of the etiology of erysipelas, which he associated with S. pyogenes. In addition, he reported using his cultures on human SubjectsJustifying the production of iatrogenic infec­tion as a means of combatting some forms of cancer - a procedure in vogue in Germany at the time.

In follow-up studies, another German surgeon, Frie­drich Julius Rosenbach, described the ability of the erysipelas-causing streptococci to spread through host tissues without causing suppuration. This research was of paramount interest to surgeons con­cerned with controlling the omnipresent infections - occasionally called “hospitalism” - that killed survi­vors of otherwise “successful” operations.

Twentieth Century

Although the use of aseptic and antiseptic techniques led to dramatic reductions in postsurgical mortality rates, maternal mortality still remained high. Dur­ing the 1920s and 1930s, the research of Leonard and Dora Cook and others permitted the identification and typing of strains of streptococci. This, in turn, led to irrefutable evidence that puerperal fever was an exogenous infection, usually transmitted from a phy­sician, midwife, or nurse attending a parturient woman (Loudon 1987). Yet even family and friends could communicate the streptococci that caused puer­peral sepsis in women in labor, for these were the same streptococci that caused erysipelas. Conse­quently, maternal mortality from puerperal fever de­clined only some time after effective antibiotics be­came available. Indeed, Irvine Loudon (1987) has shown that despite well-known changes in the viru­lence of streptococcal organisms historically, no sud­den and spontaneous decline in the virulence of the organism can account for the abrupt decline in mortal­ity from erysipelas, scarlet fever, and puerperal fever. Instead, credit for moderating these ancient scourges belongs to the beginning of the antibiotic era and, in particular, to the use of sulfonamides.

AnnG. Carmichael

Bibliography

Carter, Codell, ed. and trans. 1983. Translator’s Introduc­tion to Ignaz Semmelweis, The etiology, concept, and prophylaxis of childbed fever. Madison, Wis.

Celsus. 1938. De medicina, Vols. 3 and 5, trans. W. G. Spencer. London.

Lenhartz1 Hermann. 1902. Erysipelas and erysipeloid. In NothnageVs encyclopedia of practical medicine, ed. John W Moore, trans. Alfred Stengel. Philadelphia.

Loudon, Irvine. 1987. Puerperal fever, the streptococcus, and the sulphonamides, 1911-1945. British Medical Journal 295: 485—90.

Wilson, Leonard. 1987. The early recognition of strepto­cocci as causes of disease. Medical History 31: 3-14.

<< | >>
Source: Kiple Kenneth F. (Editor). The Cambridge World History of Human Disease. Cambridge University Press,1993. — 1200 p.. 1993

More on the topic 50 Erysipelas: