Original Research
Surgical Treatment of Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer in Older Adult Veterans
When is surgical treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancer appropriate for older patients with life-limiting comorbidities?
Marco A. Romoa; Garrison Leach, MDb; Christopher M. Reid, MDb; Riley A. Dean, MDb; Ahmed Suliman, MDb
Correspondence: Marco A. Romo (marco.romo@tufts.edu)
aTufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts
bSan Diego Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Department of Plastic Surgery, California
Author disclosures
The authors have no conflicts of interest to report and received no funding for this case report.
Disclaimer
The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of Federal Practitioner, Frontline Medical Communications Inc., the US Government, or any of its agencies. This article may discuss unlabeled or investigational use of certain drugs. Please review the complete prescribing information for specific drugs or drug combinations—including indications, contraindications, warnings, and adverse effects—before administering pharmacologic therapy to patients.
Ethics and consent
The patient provided informed consent.
Background: The rarity and heterogeneity of mucormycosis make treatment variable, and no prospective or randomized clinical trials exist in plastic surgery literature. The use of wound vacuum-assisted closure in combination with the instillation of amphotericin B to treat cutaneous mucormycosis is not well documented.
Case Presentation: A 53-year-old man underwent left Achilles tendon reconstruction with allograft after a complete tear during exercise. About 1 week after the operation, he began having incisional breakdown later found to be secondary to mucormycosis infection, prompting presentation to an emergency department. The use of negative pressure wound therapy with wound vacuum-assisted closure and intervals of instilling amphotericin B facilitated infection control in this lower extremity mucormycosis infection.
Conclusions: Patients with a localized mucormycosis infection may benefit from treatment with an instillation wound vacuum-assisted closure with topical amphotericin B as presented in this case study.
Vacuum-assisted closure (VAC) of wounds has become a foundational tool in the armamentarium of wound care specialists. Using a system consisting of a sponge, semi-occlusive barrier, and fluid collection device, VAC systems apply constant negative pressure resulting in macro and micro deformation to a wound, stabilization of the wound environment, and removal of inflammatory factors in wound fluid.1 These conditions allow for the removal of drainage and fluid from a wound bed, reduced edema and inflammation, reduced bacterial load, recruitment of healing factors, approximation of wound edges, and increased blood flow to the wound.2
In complex, infected wounds, a variation of negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) via the instillation of topical antibiotics (instillation VAC) has been used.3 This variation has been advantageous even in soft tissue fungal infections. Early and aggressive treatment of such infections is critical to prevent dissemination, particularly in aggressive infections, such as mucormycosis.4 We present a case of a patient with a mucormycosis infection of his left Achilles tendon and overlying skin who was successfully treated with surgical debridement and wound care with instillation NPWT with topical amphotericin B.
A 53-year-old man underwent left Achilles tendon reconstruction with allograft after a complete tear during exercise. He had no relevant medical history and was otherwise healthy, which he attributed to working out daily. About a week after the operation, he began having incisional breakdown, prompting presentation to an emergency department. There, he received IV antibiotics along with multiple debridements. After the wound failed to improve and intra-operative cultures grew mucormycosis, he was transferred to our facility for a higher level of care. On admission, he was immediately given IV amphotericin B and scheduled for repeat debridement.
After 1 prior debridement and 10 total days of IV amphotericin, a repeat debridement was performed. After the debridement, the installation VAC was applied to the patient’s left lower extremity wound with an instilling fluid of amphotericin B and the settings as follows: smart phase instill volume, 110 mL; soak time, 3.5 hours; target pressure, 125 mm Hg; intensity, low; and VAC therapy mode, continuous. After 5 days, the wound bed appeared clean without overt signs of infection. However, due to some toxicity to healthy surrounding soft tissue, the instillation VAC was discontinued and standard NPWT was started. The patient underwent 2 additional rounds of debridement with partial delayed closure. Four weeks after discontinuation of the instillation VAC, the wound appeared healthy and granulated so the patient underwent split-thickness skin grafting to the left posterior ankle. He subsequently completed a course of oral antifungal medication as an outpatient.
The patient was seen in the outpatient clinic for 14 months from the initial mucormycosis infection (Figure).
He was happy with his outcome and limb salvage. The skin graft had almost complete take. He has a limited range of motion at the ankle but can grossly plantarflex and dorsiflex. He reports self-treatment with physical therapy and has returned to work.When is surgical treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancer appropriate for older patients with life-limiting comorbidities?