4.7 Review

Treatment of non-tuberculosis mycobacteria skin infections

期刊

FRONTIERS IN PHARMACOLOGY
卷 14, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2023.1242156

关键词

non-tuberculosis mycobacteria (NTMs); skin diseases; infectious; anti-bacterial; mycobacterium infections, nontuberculous; atypical mycobacteria

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This review explores the complexities of non-tuberculosis mycobacteria (NTM) skin infections localized to the superficial tissues and provides valuable insights into optimal therapeutic strategies. The authors recommend antibiotic selection based on NTM species and susceptibility profiles, and advocate for a comprehensive approach that considers the unique characteristics of superficial tissues to improve treatment effectiveness.
Non-tuberculosis mycobacteria (NTM) skin infections have become increasingly prevalent in recent years, presenting a unique challenge in clinical management. This review explored the complexities of NTM infections localized to the superficial tissues and provided valuable insights into the optimal therapeutic strategies. The antibiotic selection should base on NTM species and their susceptibility profiles. It is recommended to adopt a comprehensive approach that considers the unique characteristics of superficial tissues to improve treatment effectiveness and reduce the incidence of adverse reactions, infection recurrence, and treatment failure. Infection control measures, patient education, and close monitoring should complement the treatment strategies to achieve favorable outcomes in managing NTM skin infections. Further efforts are warranted to elucidate factors and mechanisms contributing to treatment resistance and relapse. Future research should focus on exploring novel treatment options, innovative drug development/delivery platforms, and precise methodologies for determining therapeutic duration. Longitudinal studies are also needed to assess the long-term safety profiles of the integrated approaches.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据