TABLE 1.
Patient and time | No. of samples | Toenail sampleda | Microscopyb | % of area involvedc | RFLP typed | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Patients with T. rubrum infection | ||||||
Patient 1 | ||||||
Aug. 97e | R3 | Pos. | 100 | Tr-1 | ||
Sept. 97e | Pos. | 60 | Tr-1 | |||
Nov. 97 | Pos. | 40 | Tr-1 | |||
Dec. 97 | Pos. | 20 | Tr-1 | |||
Jan. 98 | Pos. | 5 | Tr-1 | |||
June 98e | 6 | Neg. | 0 | Tr-1 | ||
Patient 2 | ||||||
May 97e | R1 | Pos. | 40 | Tr-2 | ||
Jun. 97e | Pos. | 30 | Tr-2 | |||
Sept. 97 | Neg. | 20 | Tr-2 | |||
Nov. 97e | Pos. | 20 | Tr-2 | |||
Feb. 98 | 5 | Pos. | 15 | Tr-2 | ||
Patient 3 | ||||||
Nov. 97e | R1 | Pos. | 70 | Tr-3 | ||
Dec. 97e | L1 | Pos. | 70 | Tr-4 | ||
Jan. 98e | R1 | Pos. | 60 | Tr-4 | ||
Mar. 98 | 4 | Pos. | 50 | Tr-3 | ||
Patient 4 | ||||||
Dec. 96e | L1 | Pos. | 50 | Tr-5 | ||
Sept. 97e | Pos. | 20 | Tr-3 | |||
Nov. 97e | Neg. | 7.5 | Tr-3 | |||
Dec. 97 | Pos. | 7.5 | Tr-5 | |||
Mar. 98e | 5 | Neg. | 7.5 | Tr-5 | ||
Patient 5 | ||||||
Dec. 96 | R1 | Pos. | 80 | Tr-1 | ||
July 97e | L1 | Pos. | 60 | Tr-2 | ||
Aug. 97 | Pos. | 50 | Tr-1 | |||
Nov. 97 | Pos. | 10 | Tr-2 | |||
Feb. 98 | 5 | Pos. | 0 | Tr-2 | ||
Patient 6 | ||||||
Sept. 97e | R1 | Pos. | 70 | Tr-3 | ||
Oct. 97e | L1 | Neg. | 70 | Tr-3 | ||
Dec. 97 | Pos. | 50 | Tr-3 | |||
Jan. 98 | Pos. | 50 | Tr-3 | |||
Dec. 98 | Pos. | 10 | Tr-3 | |||
Apr. 99 | 6 | Neg. | 7.5 | Tr-5 | ||
Patient 7 | ||||||
Nov. 97e | R1 | Pos. | 70 | Tr-1 | ||
Feb. 98 | Pos. | 60 | Tr-1 | |||
Apr. 98e | Pos. | 55 | Tr-1 | |||
May 98e | Pos. | 55 | Tr-1 | |||
Dec. 98 | 5 | Pos. | 10 | Tr-1 | ||
Patient 8 | ||||||
July 97e | L1 | Pos. | 70 | Tr-1 | ||
Aug. 97 | Pos. | 60 | Tr-1 | |||
Sept. 97 | Pos. | 50 | Tr-1 | |||
Jan. 98 | Pos. | 50 | Tr-1 | |||
Apr. 98e | Pos. | 50 | Tr-1 | |||
July 98 | 6 | Neg. | 7.5 | Tr-1 |
Patient 9 | |||||
Jan. 98e | L1 | Pos. | 95 | Tr-4 | |
Feb. 98e | Pos. | 95 | Tr-3 | ||
Mar. 98e | Pos. | 90 | Tr-3 | ||
Apr. 98 | 4 | Pos. | 80 | Tr-3 | |
Patient 10 | |||||
July 97e | R1 | Pos. | 40 | Tr-3 | |
Aug. 97e | Pos. | 40 | Tr-3 | ||
Oct. 97 | 3 | Pos. | 20 | Tr-3 | |
Patient 11 | |||||
May 97e | R1 | Pos. | 30 | Tr-3 | |
Sept. 97e | Pos. | 80 | Tr-3 | ||
Jan. 98 | 3 | Pos. | 70 | Tr-3 | |
Patient 12 | |||||
Aug. 97e | L3 | Pos. | 80 | Tr-5 | |
Sept. 97e | Pos. | 60 | Tr-5 | ||
Oct. 97 | 3 | Pos. | 20 | Tr-5 | |
Patient 13 | |||||
July 97e | R1 | Pos. | 90 | Tr-3 | |
Dec. 97 | 2 | Neg. | 40 | Tr-3 | |
Patient 14 | |||||
Jan. 97 | L1 | Pos. | 100 | Tr-3 | |
Apr. 97e | 2 | R1 | Pos. | 80 | Tr-3 |
Patient 15 | |||||
Mar. 97 | L1 | Pos. | 100 | Tr-2 | |
Apr. 97e | R1 | Pos. | 100 | Tr-2 | |
Dec. 97 | 3 | Neg. | 0 | Tr-5 | |
Patient 16 | |||||
May 98e | R1 | Pos. | 70 | Tr-3 | |
June 98e | Pos. | 60 | Tr-3 | ||
July 98e | 4 | Pos. | 60 | Tr-3 | |
Aug 98 | Neg. | 50 | Tr-3 | ||
Patients with T. mentagrophytes infection | |||||
Patient 1 | |||||
June 97e | L1 | Pos. | 85 | Tm-1 | |
Aug. 97 | Pos. | 50 | Tm-1 | ||
Sept. 97 | 3 | Pos. | 50 | Tm-1 | |
Patient 2 | |||||
Sept. 97e | L1 | Pos. | 20 | Tm-1 | |
Nov. 97 | Pos. | 20 | Tm-1 | ||
Dec. 97 | 3 | Pos. | 20 | Tm-1 | |
Patient 3 | |||||
Aug. 97e | L1 | Pos. | 60 | Tm-2 | |
Sept. 97 | Pos. | 55 | Tm-2 | ||
Nov. 97 | 3 | Pos. | 55 | Tm-2 | |
Patient 4 | |||||
July 97e | L1 | Pos. | 90 | Tm-1 | |
Aug. 97 | 2 | Pos. | 80 | Tm-1 |
Infected toenails were collected from either the right (R) or the left (L) toes.
Result of microscopic examination of the clinical material; Pos. represents the presence of fungal filaments, and Neg. represents no fungal filaments in the specimen under the microscope. All specimens were culture positive for T. mentagrophytes.
The percentage of the nail infected was estimated visually.
RFLP pattern observed by hybridization of the PCR-amplified ITS region used as a probe against EcoRI-digested total genomic DNA. Tr, T. rubrum RFLP type; Tm, T. mentagrophytes RFLP type.
Time period when the patient was under treatment. The two oral antifungals used for treatment were itraconazole and terbinafine. Time periods not marked represent follow-up examinations.