Article

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is pushing further deployments of the system to June 2023 “to address challenges” and make sure it’s functioning optimally.

Among the challenges: Safety concerns “voluminous enough and prevalent enough” to prompt the VA to disclose to 41,500 veterans enrolled in Washington, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, and Ohio that their care “may have been impacted as a result of the system’s deployment as it is currently configured,” VA Undersecretary for Health Shereef Elnahal said in a news conference.

The plan was to launch in the first quarter of 2023 in Western Washington, Michigan, and Ohio. But in a recent release, the VA said an investigation had found several technical and system issues, such as latency and slowness, and problems with patient scheduling, referrals, medication management, and other types of medical orders. During this “assess and address” period, the VA says, it will correct outstanding issues—especially those that may have patient safety implications—before restarting deployments at other VA medical centers.

“Right now, the Oracle Cerner [EHR] system is not delivering for veterans or VA health care providers—and we are holding Oracle Cerner and ourselves accountable to get this right,” said VA Deputy Secretary Donald Remy, who has oversight over the EHR program. “We are delaying all future deployments of the new EHR while we fully assess performance and address every concern. Veterans and clinicians deserve a seamless, modernized health record system, and we will not rest until they get it.”

The modernized EHR, intended to replace the Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture (VistA), has been plagued by problems from the very first launch in October 2020 at Mann-Grandstaff VA Medical Center and associated clinics in the Northwest. Deputy Inspector David Case, of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), reported to the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs on oversight between 2020 and July 2021. Among other things, the OIG identified problems with the infrastructure and with users’ experiences. Clinical and administrative staff at Mann-Grandstaff and a Columbus clinic shared their frustration with OIG personnel about the “significant system and process limitations that raised concerns about the continuity of and prompt access to quality patient care.”

For example, according to an OIG report from July 2022, the new EHR sent thousands of orders for medical care to an “undetectable location, or unknown queue” instead of the intended location. The mis-delivery caused 149 patient harm events.

On October 11, the VA confirmed to The Spokesman-Review, a Spokane-based newspaper, that a patient had died at the VA clinic in Columbus. The death was attributed to the patient not receiving medication due to incorrect information. The incident is being treated as a potential “sentinel event.”

Elnahal, who met with employees in September at the Columbus clinic where the Oracle Cerner system was launched in April, said he found that the highly complex system made it hard for clinicians to perform routine tasks, such as ordering tests or follow-up appointments. Delays in follow-ups—including a yearlong delay in treatment for a veteran ultimately diagnosed with terminal cancer—were the main cause of the cases of harm cited in the July OIG report.

The veterans who received the letter about the potential impact on their health care “got caught up in this phenomenon of commands not getting where they need to go,” Elnahal said in a news conference in September.

Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior member of the Veterans Affairs Committee, has been consistently pressing the VA to do something about the EHR system’s flaws. “It’s painfully clear,” she said in a statement, “we need to stop this program until the VA can fix these serious issues before they hurt anyone else.”

After finding more than 200 orders in the unknown queue in May 2022, the OIG said, it “has concerns with the effectiveness of Cerner’s plan to mitigate the safety risk.” While executing its “assess and address” plan, the VA will continue to focus on the 5 facilities where the new system has been deployed. “Sometimes, you’re not presented with options to immediately resolve the safety concerns that are in front of you,” Elnahal told reporters. “It is simply the case that the best option in front of us to resolve these patient safety concerns is to work with Oracle Cerner over the next several months to resolve the Cerner system issues at the sites where it exists. We know that this is possible, because other health systems have gone through this journey before, and I think we can do it.”

Veterans who believe their care may have been affected can call a dedicated call center at 800.319.9446. A VA health care team will follow up within 5 days.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is pushing further deployments of the system to June 2023 “to address challenges” and make sure it’s functioning optimally.

Among the challenges: Safety concerns “voluminous enough and prevalent enough” to prompt the VA to disclose to 41,500 veterans enrolled in Washington, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, and Ohio that their care “may have been impacted as a result of the system’s deployment as it is currently configured,” VA Undersecretary for Health Shereef Elnahal said in a news conference.

The plan was to launch in the first quarter of 2023 in Western Washington, Michigan, and Ohio. But in a recent release, the VA said an investigation had found several technical and system issues, such as latency and slowness, and problems with patient scheduling, referrals, medication management, and other types of medical orders. During this “assess and address” period, the VA says, it will correct outstanding issues—especially those that may have patient safety implications—before restarting deployments at other VA medical centers.

“Right now, the Oracle Cerner [EHR] system is not delivering for veterans or VA health care providers—and we are holding Oracle Cerner and ourselves accountable to get this right,” said VA Deputy Secretary Donald Remy, who has oversight over the EHR program. “We are delaying all future deployments of the new EHR while we fully assess performance and address every concern. Veterans and clinicians deserve a seamless, modernized health record system, and we will not rest until they get it.”

The modernized EHR, intended to replace the Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture (VistA), has been plagued by problems from the very first launch in October 2020 at Mann-Grandstaff VA Medical Center and associated clinics in the Northwest. Deputy Inspector David Case, of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), reported to the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs on oversight between 2020 and July 2021. Among other things, the OIG identified problems with the infrastructure and with users’ experiences. Clinical and administrative staff at Mann-Grandstaff and a Columbus clinic shared their frustration with OIG personnel about the “significant system and process limitations that raised concerns about the continuity of and prompt access to quality patient care.”

For example, according to an OIG report from July 2022, the new EHR sent thousands of orders for medical care to an “undetectable location, or unknown queue” instead of the intended location. The mis-delivery caused 149 patient harm events.

On October 11, the VA confirmed to The Spokesman-Review, a Spokane-based newspaper, that a patient had died at the VA clinic in Columbus. The death was attributed to the patient not receiving medication due to incorrect information. The incident is being treated as a potential “sentinel event.”

Elnahal, who met with employees in September at the Columbus clinic where the Oracle Cerner system was launched in April, said he found that the highly complex system made it hard for clinicians to perform routine tasks, such as ordering tests or follow-up appointments. Delays in follow-ups—including a yearlong delay in treatment for a veteran ultimately diagnosed with terminal cancer—were the main cause of the cases of harm cited in the July OIG report.

The veterans who received the letter about the potential impact on their health care “got caught up in this phenomenon of commands not getting where they need to go,” Elnahal said in a news conference in September.

Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior member of the Veterans Affairs Committee, has been consistently pressing the VA to do something about the EHR system’s flaws. “It’s painfully clear,” she said in a statement, “we need to stop this program until the VA can fix these serious issues before they hurt anyone else.”

After finding more than 200 orders in the unknown queue in May 2022, the OIG said, it “has concerns with the effectiveness of Cerner’s plan to mitigate the safety risk.” While executing its “assess and address” plan, the VA will continue to focus on the 5 facilities where the new system has been deployed. “Sometimes, you’re not presented with options to immediately resolve the safety concerns that are in front of you,” Elnahal told reporters. “It is simply the case that the best option in front of us to resolve these patient safety concerns is to work with Oracle Cerner over the next several months to resolve the Cerner system issues at the sites where it exists. We know that this is possible, because other health systems have gone through this journey before, and I think we can do it.”

Veterans who believe their care may have been affected can call a dedicated call center at 800.319.9446. A VA health care team will follow up within 5 days.

The US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is pushing further deployments of the system to June 2023 “to address challenges” and make sure it’s functioning optimally.

Among the challenges: Safety concerns “voluminous enough and prevalent enough” to prompt the VA to disclose to 41,500 veterans enrolled in Washington, Idaho, Oregon, Montana, and Ohio that their care “may have been impacted as a result of the system’s deployment as it is currently configured,” VA Undersecretary for Health Shereef Elnahal said in a news conference.

The plan was to launch in the first quarter of 2023 in Western Washington, Michigan, and Ohio. But in a recent release, the VA said an investigation had found several technical and system issues, such as latency and slowness, and problems with patient scheduling, referrals, medication management, and other types of medical orders. During this “assess and address” period, the VA says, it will correct outstanding issues—especially those that may have patient safety implications—before restarting deployments at other VA medical centers.

“Right now, the Oracle Cerner [EHR] system is not delivering for veterans or VA health care providers—and we are holding Oracle Cerner and ourselves accountable to get this right,” said VA Deputy Secretary Donald Remy, who has oversight over the EHR program. “We are delaying all future deployments of the new EHR while we fully assess performance and address every concern. Veterans and clinicians deserve a seamless, modernized health record system, and we will not rest until they get it.”

The modernized EHR, intended to replace the Veterans Health Information Systems and Technology Architecture (VistA), has been plagued by problems from the very first launch in October 2020 at Mann-Grandstaff VA Medical Center and associated clinics in the Northwest. Deputy Inspector David Case, of the Office of Inspector General (OIG), reported to the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs on oversight between 2020 and July 2021. Among other things, the OIG identified problems with the infrastructure and with users’ experiences. Clinical and administrative staff at Mann-Grandstaff and a Columbus clinic shared their frustration with OIG personnel about the “significant system and process limitations that raised concerns about the continuity of and prompt access to quality patient care.”

For example, according to an OIG report from July 2022, the new EHR sent thousands of orders for medical care to an “undetectable location, or unknown queue” instead of the intended location. The mis-delivery caused 149 patient harm events.

On October 11, the VA confirmed to The Spokesman-Review, a Spokane-based newspaper, that a patient had died at the VA clinic in Columbus. The death was attributed to the patient not receiving medication due to incorrect information. The incident is being treated as a potential “sentinel event.”

Elnahal, who met with employees in September at the Columbus clinic where the Oracle Cerner system was launched in April, said he found that the highly complex system made it hard for clinicians to perform routine tasks, such as ordering tests or follow-up appointments. Delays in follow-ups—including a yearlong delay in treatment for a veteran ultimately diagnosed with terminal cancer—were the main cause of the cases of harm cited in the July OIG report.

The veterans who received the letter about the potential impact on their health care “got caught up in this phenomenon of commands not getting where they need to go,” Elnahal said in a news conference in September.

Senator Patty Murray (D-WA), a senior member of the Veterans Affairs Committee, has been consistently pressing the VA to do something about the EHR system’s flaws. “It’s painfully clear,” she said in a statement, “we need to stop this program until the VA can fix these serious issues before they hurt anyone else.”

After finding more than 200 orders in the unknown queue in May 2022, the OIG said, it “has concerns with the effectiveness of Cerner’s plan to mitigate the safety risk.” While executing its “assess and address” plan, the VA will continue to focus on the 5 facilities where the new system has been deployed. “Sometimes, you’re not presented with options to immediately resolve the safety concerns that are in front of you,” Elnahal told reporters. “It is simply the case that the best option in front of us to resolve these patient safety concerns is to work with Oracle Cerner over the next several months to resolve the Cerner system issues at the sites where it exists. We know that this is possible, because other health systems have gone through this journey before, and I think we can do it.”

Veterans who believe their care may have been affected can call a dedicated call center at 800.319.9446. A VA health care team will follow up within 5 days.

To the Editor:

Amiodarone is an oral or intravenous (IV) drug commonly used to treat supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmia as well as atrial fibrillation.¹ Adverse drug reactions associated with the use of amiodarone include pulmonary, gastrointestinal, thyroid, ocular, neurologic, and cutaneous reactions.¹ Long-term use of amiodarone—typically more than 4 months—can lead to slate-gray skin discoloration and photosensitivity, both of which can be reversed with drug withdrawal.^2,3 Phlebitis also has been described in less than 3% of patients who receive peripheral IV administration of amiodarone.⁴

Amiodarone-induced skin necrosis due to extravasation is a rare complication of this antiarrhythmic medication, with only 3 reported cases in the literature according to a PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the search terms amiodarone and skin and (necrosis or ischemia or extravasation or reaction).^5–7 Although hyaluronidase is a known therapy for extravasation of fluids, including parenteral nutrition and chemotherapy, its use for the treatment of extravasation from amiodarone is not well documented.⁶ We report a case of skin necrosis of the left dorsal forearm and the left dorsal and ventral hand following infusion of amiodarone through a peripheral IV line, which was treated with injections of hyaluronidase.

A 77-year-old man was admitted to the emergency department for sepsis secondary to cholangitis in the setting of an obstructive gallbladder stone. His medical history was notable for multivessel coronary artery disease and atrial flutter treated with ablation. One day after admission, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was attempted and aborted due to atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response. A second endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography attempt was made 4 days later, during which the patient underwent cardiac arrest. During this event, amiodarone was administered in a 200-mL solution (1.8 mg/mL) in 5% dextrose through a peripheral IV line in the left forearm. The patient was stabilized and transferred to the intensive care unit.

Twenty-four hours after amiodarone administration, erythema was noted on the left dorsal forearm. Within hours, the digits of the hand became a dark, dusky color, which spread to involve the forearm. Surgical debridement was not deemed necessary; the left arm was elevated, and warm compresses were applied regularly. Within the next week, the skin of the left hand and dorsal forearm had progressively worsened and took on a well-demarcated, dusky blue hue surrounded by an erythematous border involving the proximal forearm and upper arm (Figure 1A). The skin was fragile and had overlying bullae (Figure 1B).

Hyaluronidase (1000 U) was injected into the surrounding areas of erythema, which resolved from the left proximal forearm to the elbow within 2 days after injection (Figure 2). The dusky violaceous patches were persistent, and the necrotic bullae were unchanged. Hyaluronidase (1000 U) was injected into necrotic skin of the left dorsal forearm and dorsal and ventral hand. No improvement was noted on subsequent evaluations of this area. While still an inpatient, he received wound care and twice-daily Doppler ultrasounds in the areas of necrosis. The patient lost sensation in the left hand with increased soft tissue necrosis and developed an eschar on the left dorsal forearm. Due to the progressive loss of function and necrosis, a partial forearm amputation was performed that healed well, and the patient experienced improvement in range of motion of the left upper extremity.

Well-known adverse reactions of amiodarone treatment include pulmonary fibrosis, hepatic dysfunction, hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism, peripheral neuropathy, and corneal deposits.¹ Cutaneous adverse reactions include photosensitivity (phototoxic and photoallergic reactions), hyperpigmentation, pseudoporphyria, and linear IgA bullous dermatosis. Less commonly, it also can cause urticaria, pruritus, erythema nodosum, purpura, and toxic epidermal necrolysis.³ Amiodarone-induced skin necrosis is rare, first described by Russell and Saltissi⁵ in 2006 in a 60-year-old man who developed dark discoloration and edema of the forearm 24 hours after initiation of an amiodarone peripheral IV. The patient was treated with hot or cold packs and steroid cream per the pharmaceutical company’s recommendations; however, patient outcomes were not discussed.⁵ A 77-year-old man who received subcutaneous amiodarone due to misplaced vascular access developed edema and bullae of the forearm followed by tissue necrosis, resulting in notably reduced mobility.⁶ Fox et al⁷ described a 60-year-old man who developed atrial fibrillation after emergent spinal fusion and laminectomy. He received intradermal hyaluronidase administration within 24 hours of developing severe pain from extravasation induced by amiodarone with no adverse outcomes and full recovery.⁷

There are numerous properties of amiodarone that may have resulted in the skin necrosis seen in these cases. The acidic pH (3.5–4.5) of amiodarone can contribute to coagulative necrosis, cellular desiccation, eschar formation, and edema.⁸ It also can contain additives such as polysorbate and benzyl alcohol, which may contribute to the drug’s vesicant properties.⁹

Current recommendations for IV administration of amiodarone include delivery through a central vein with high concentrations (>2 mg/mL) because peripheral infusion is slower and may cause phlebitis.⁴ In-line filters also may be a potential method of preventing phlebitis with peripheral IV administration of amiodarone.¹⁰ Extravasation of amiodarone can be treated nonpharmacologically with limb elevation and warm compresses, as these methods may promote vasodilation and enhance drug removal.^5-7 However, when extravasation leads to progressive erythema and skin necrosis or is refractory to these therapies, intradermal injection of hyaluronidase should be considered. Hyaluronidase mediates the degradation of hyaluronic acid in the extracellular matrix, allowing for increased permeability of injected fluids into tissues and diluting the concentration of toxins at the site of exposure.^9,11 It has been used to treat extravasation of fluids such as parenteral nutrition, electrolyte infusion, antibiotics, aminophylline, mannitol, and chemotherapy.¹¹ Although hyaluronidase has been recognized as therapeutic for extravasation, there is no established consistent dosing or proper technique. In the setting of infiltration of chemotherapy, doses of hyaluronidase ranging from 150 to 1500 U/mL can be subcutaneously or intradermally injected into the site within 1 hour of extravasation. Side effects of using hyaluronidase are rare, including local pruritus, allergic reactions, urticaria, and angioedema.¹²

The patient described by Fox et al⁷ who fully recovered from amiodarone extravasation after hyaluronidase injections likely benefited from quick intervention, as he received amiodarone within 24 hours of the care team identifying initial erythema. Although our patient did have improvement of the areas of erythema on the forearm, evidence of skin and subcutaneous tissue necrosis on the left hand and proximal forearm was already apparent and not reversible, most likely caused by late intervention of intradermal hyaluronidase almost a week after the extravasation event. It is important to identify amiodarone as the source of extravasation and administer intradermal hyaluronidase in a timely fashion for extravasation refractory to conventional measurements to prevent progression to severe tissue damage.

Our case draws attention to the risk for skin necrosis with peripheral IV administration of amiodarone. Interventions include limb elevation, warm compresses, and consideration of intradermal hyaluronidase within 24 hours of extravasation, as this may reduce the severity of subsequent tissue damage with minimal side effects.

To the Editor:

Amiodarone is an oral or intravenous (IV) drug commonly used to treat supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmia as well as atrial fibrillation.¹ Adverse drug reactions associated with the use of amiodarone include pulmonary, gastrointestinal, thyroid, ocular, neurologic, and cutaneous reactions.¹ Long-term use of amiodarone—typically more than 4 months—can lead to slate-gray skin discoloration and photosensitivity, both of which can be reversed with drug withdrawal.^2,3 Phlebitis also has been described in less than 3% of patients who receive peripheral IV administration of amiodarone.⁴

Amiodarone-induced skin necrosis due to extravasation is a rare complication of this antiarrhythmic medication, with only 3 reported cases in the literature according to a PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the search terms amiodarone and skin and (necrosis or ischemia or extravasation or reaction).^5–7 Although hyaluronidase is a known therapy for extravasation of fluids, including parenteral nutrition and chemotherapy, its use for the treatment of extravasation from amiodarone is not well documented.⁶ We report a case of skin necrosis of the left dorsal forearm and the left dorsal and ventral hand following infusion of amiodarone through a peripheral IV line, which was treated with injections of hyaluronidase.

A 77-year-old man was admitted to the emergency department for sepsis secondary to cholangitis in the setting of an obstructive gallbladder stone. His medical history was notable for multivessel coronary artery disease and atrial flutter treated with ablation. One day after admission, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was attempted and aborted due to atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response. A second endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography attempt was made 4 days later, during which the patient underwent cardiac arrest. During this event, amiodarone was administered in a 200-mL solution (1.8 mg/mL) in 5% dextrose through a peripheral IV line in the left forearm. The patient was stabilized and transferred to the intensive care unit.

Twenty-four hours after amiodarone administration, erythema was noted on the left dorsal forearm. Within hours, the digits of the hand became a dark, dusky color, which spread to involve the forearm. Surgical debridement was not deemed necessary; the left arm was elevated, and warm compresses were applied regularly. Within the next week, the skin of the left hand and dorsal forearm had progressively worsened and took on a well-demarcated, dusky blue hue surrounded by an erythematous border involving the proximal forearm and upper arm (Figure 1A). The skin was fragile and had overlying bullae (Figure 1B).

Hyaluronidase (1000 U) was injected into the surrounding areas of erythema, which resolved from the left proximal forearm to the elbow within 2 days after injection (Figure 2). The dusky violaceous patches were persistent, and the necrotic bullae were unchanged. Hyaluronidase (1000 U) was injected into necrotic skin of the left dorsal forearm and dorsal and ventral hand. No improvement was noted on subsequent evaluations of this area. While still an inpatient, he received wound care and twice-daily Doppler ultrasounds in the areas of necrosis. The patient lost sensation in the left hand with increased soft tissue necrosis and developed an eschar on the left dorsal forearm. Due to the progressive loss of function and necrosis, a partial forearm amputation was performed that healed well, and the patient experienced improvement in range of motion of the left upper extremity.

Well-known adverse reactions of amiodarone treatment include pulmonary fibrosis, hepatic dysfunction, hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism, peripheral neuropathy, and corneal deposits.¹ Cutaneous adverse reactions include photosensitivity (phototoxic and photoallergic reactions), hyperpigmentation, pseudoporphyria, and linear IgA bullous dermatosis. Less commonly, it also can cause urticaria, pruritus, erythema nodosum, purpura, and toxic epidermal necrolysis.³ Amiodarone-induced skin necrosis is rare, first described by Russell and Saltissi⁵ in 2006 in a 60-year-old man who developed dark discoloration and edema of the forearm 24 hours after initiation of an amiodarone peripheral IV. The patient was treated with hot or cold packs and steroid cream per the pharmaceutical company’s recommendations; however, patient outcomes were not discussed.⁵ A 77-year-old man who received subcutaneous amiodarone due to misplaced vascular access developed edema and bullae of the forearm followed by tissue necrosis, resulting in notably reduced mobility.⁶ Fox et al⁷ described a 60-year-old man who developed atrial fibrillation after emergent spinal fusion and laminectomy. He received intradermal hyaluronidase administration within 24 hours of developing severe pain from extravasation induced by amiodarone with no adverse outcomes and full recovery.⁷

There are numerous properties of amiodarone that may have resulted in the skin necrosis seen in these cases. The acidic pH (3.5–4.5) of amiodarone can contribute to coagulative necrosis, cellular desiccation, eschar formation, and edema.⁸ It also can contain additives such as polysorbate and benzyl alcohol, which may contribute to the drug’s vesicant properties.⁹

Current recommendations for IV administration of amiodarone include delivery through a central vein with high concentrations (>2 mg/mL) because peripheral infusion is slower and may cause phlebitis.⁴ In-line filters also may be a potential method of preventing phlebitis with peripheral IV administration of amiodarone.¹⁰ Extravasation of amiodarone can be treated nonpharmacologically with limb elevation and warm compresses, as these methods may promote vasodilation and enhance drug removal.^5-7 However, when extravasation leads to progressive erythema and skin necrosis or is refractory to these therapies, intradermal injection of hyaluronidase should be considered. Hyaluronidase mediates the degradation of hyaluronic acid in the extracellular matrix, allowing for increased permeability of injected fluids into tissues and diluting the concentration of toxins at the site of exposure.^9,11 It has been used to treat extravasation of fluids such as parenteral nutrition, electrolyte infusion, antibiotics, aminophylline, mannitol, and chemotherapy.¹¹ Although hyaluronidase has been recognized as therapeutic for extravasation, there is no established consistent dosing or proper technique. In the setting of infiltration of chemotherapy, doses of hyaluronidase ranging from 150 to 1500 U/mL can be subcutaneously or intradermally injected into the site within 1 hour of extravasation. Side effects of using hyaluronidase are rare, including local pruritus, allergic reactions, urticaria, and angioedema.¹²

The patient described by Fox et al⁷ who fully recovered from amiodarone extravasation after hyaluronidase injections likely benefited from quick intervention, as he received amiodarone within 24 hours of the care team identifying initial erythema. Although our patient did have improvement of the areas of erythema on the forearm, evidence of skin and subcutaneous tissue necrosis on the left hand and proximal forearm was already apparent and not reversible, most likely caused by late intervention of intradermal hyaluronidase almost a week after the extravasation event. It is important to identify amiodarone as the source of extravasation and administer intradermal hyaluronidase in a timely fashion for extravasation refractory to conventional measurements to prevent progression to severe tissue damage.

Our case draws attention to the risk for skin necrosis with peripheral IV administration of amiodarone. Interventions include limb elevation, warm compresses, and consideration of intradermal hyaluronidase within 24 hours of extravasation, as this may reduce the severity of subsequent tissue damage with minimal side effects.

To the Editor:

Amiodarone is an oral or intravenous (IV) drug commonly used to treat supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmia as well as atrial fibrillation.¹ Adverse drug reactions associated with the use of amiodarone include pulmonary, gastrointestinal, thyroid, ocular, neurologic, and cutaneous reactions.¹ Long-term use of amiodarone—typically more than 4 months—can lead to slate-gray skin discoloration and photosensitivity, both of which can be reversed with drug withdrawal.^2,3 Phlebitis also has been described in less than 3% of patients who receive peripheral IV administration of amiodarone.⁴

Amiodarone-induced skin necrosis due to extravasation is a rare complication of this antiarrhythmic medication, with only 3 reported cases in the literature according to a PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the search terms amiodarone and skin and (necrosis or ischemia or extravasation or reaction).^5–7 Although hyaluronidase is a known therapy for extravasation of fluids, including parenteral nutrition and chemotherapy, its use for the treatment of extravasation from amiodarone is not well documented.⁶ We report a case of skin necrosis of the left dorsal forearm and the left dorsal and ventral hand following infusion of amiodarone through a peripheral IV line, which was treated with injections of hyaluronidase.

A 77-year-old man was admitted to the emergency department for sepsis secondary to cholangitis in the setting of an obstructive gallbladder stone. His medical history was notable for multivessel coronary artery disease and atrial flutter treated with ablation. One day after admission, endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography was attempted and aborted due to atrial fibrillation with rapid ventricular response. A second endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography attempt was made 4 days later, during which the patient underwent cardiac arrest. During this event, amiodarone was administered in a 200-mL solution (1.8 mg/mL) in 5% dextrose through a peripheral IV line in the left forearm. The patient was stabilized and transferred to the intensive care unit.

Twenty-four hours after amiodarone administration, erythema was noted on the left dorsal forearm. Within hours, the digits of the hand became a dark, dusky color, which spread to involve the forearm. Surgical debridement was not deemed necessary; the left arm was elevated, and warm compresses were applied regularly. Within the next week, the skin of the left hand and dorsal forearm had progressively worsened and took on a well-demarcated, dusky blue hue surrounded by an erythematous border involving the proximal forearm and upper arm (Figure 1A). The skin was fragile and had overlying bullae (Figure 1B).

Hyaluronidase (1000 U) was injected into the surrounding areas of erythema, which resolved from the left proximal forearm to the elbow within 2 days after injection (Figure 2). The dusky violaceous patches were persistent, and the necrotic bullae were unchanged. Hyaluronidase (1000 U) was injected into necrotic skin of the left dorsal forearm and dorsal and ventral hand. No improvement was noted on subsequent evaluations of this area. While still an inpatient, he received wound care and twice-daily Doppler ultrasounds in the areas of necrosis. The patient lost sensation in the left hand with increased soft tissue necrosis and developed an eschar on the left dorsal forearm. Due to the progressive loss of function and necrosis, a partial forearm amputation was performed that healed well, and the patient experienced improvement in range of motion of the left upper extremity.

Well-known adverse reactions of amiodarone treatment include pulmonary fibrosis, hepatic dysfunction, hypothyroidism and hyperthyroidism, peripheral neuropathy, and corneal deposits.¹ Cutaneous adverse reactions include photosensitivity (phototoxic and photoallergic reactions), hyperpigmentation, pseudoporphyria, and linear IgA bullous dermatosis. Less commonly, it also can cause urticaria, pruritus, erythema nodosum, purpura, and toxic epidermal necrolysis.³ Amiodarone-induced skin necrosis is rare, first described by Russell and Saltissi⁵ in 2006 in a 60-year-old man who developed dark discoloration and edema of the forearm 24 hours after initiation of an amiodarone peripheral IV. The patient was treated with hot or cold packs and steroid cream per the pharmaceutical company’s recommendations; however, patient outcomes were not discussed.⁵ A 77-year-old man who received subcutaneous amiodarone due to misplaced vascular access developed edema and bullae of the forearm followed by tissue necrosis, resulting in notably reduced mobility.⁶ Fox et al⁷ described a 60-year-old man who developed atrial fibrillation after emergent spinal fusion and laminectomy. He received intradermal hyaluronidase administration within 24 hours of developing severe pain from extravasation induced by amiodarone with no adverse outcomes and full recovery.⁷

There are numerous properties of amiodarone that may have resulted in the skin necrosis seen in these cases. The acidic pH (3.5–4.5) of amiodarone can contribute to coagulative necrosis, cellular desiccation, eschar formation, and edema.⁸ It also can contain additives such as polysorbate and benzyl alcohol, which may contribute to the drug’s vesicant properties.⁹

Current recommendations for IV administration of amiodarone include delivery through a central vein with high concentrations (>2 mg/mL) because peripheral infusion is slower and may cause phlebitis.⁴ In-line filters also may be a potential method of preventing phlebitis with peripheral IV administration of amiodarone.¹⁰ Extravasation of amiodarone can be treated nonpharmacologically with limb elevation and warm compresses, as these methods may promote vasodilation and enhance drug removal.^5-7 However, when extravasation leads to progressive erythema and skin necrosis or is refractory to these therapies, intradermal injection of hyaluronidase should be considered. Hyaluronidase mediates the degradation of hyaluronic acid in the extracellular matrix, allowing for increased permeability of injected fluids into tissues and diluting the concentration of toxins at the site of exposure.^9,11 It has been used to treat extravasation of fluids such as parenteral nutrition, electrolyte infusion, antibiotics, aminophylline, mannitol, and chemotherapy.¹¹ Although hyaluronidase has been recognized as therapeutic for extravasation, there is no established consistent dosing or proper technique. In the setting of infiltration of chemotherapy, doses of hyaluronidase ranging from 150 to 1500 U/mL can be subcutaneously or intradermally injected into the site within 1 hour of extravasation. Side effects of using hyaluronidase are rare, including local pruritus, allergic reactions, urticaria, and angioedema.¹²

The patient described by Fox et al⁷ who fully recovered from amiodarone extravasation after hyaluronidase injections likely benefited from quick intervention, as he received amiodarone within 24 hours of the care team identifying initial erythema. Although our patient did have improvement of the areas of erythema on the forearm, evidence of skin and subcutaneous tissue necrosis on the left hand and proximal forearm was already apparent and not reversible, most likely caused by late intervention of intradermal hyaluronidase almost a week after the extravasation event. It is important to identify amiodarone as the source of extravasation and administer intradermal hyaluronidase in a timely fashion for extravasation refractory to conventional measurements to prevent progression to severe tissue damage.

Our case draws attention to the risk for skin necrosis with peripheral IV administration of amiodarone. Interventions include limb elevation, warm compresses, and consideration of intradermal hyaluronidase within 24 hours of extravasation, as this may reduce the severity of subsequent tissue damage with minimal side effects.

To the Editor:

Genital lentiginosis (also known as mucosal melanotic macules, vulvar melanosis, penile melanosis, and penile lentigines) occurs in men and women.¹ Lesions present in adult life as multifocal, asymmetrical, pigmented patches that can have a mottled appearance or exhibit skip areas. The irregular appearance of the pigmented areas often raises concern for melanoma. Biopsy reveals increased pigmentation along the basal layer of the epidermis; the irregular distribution of single melanocytes and pagetoid spread typical of melanoma in situ is not identified.

Genital lentiginosis usually occurs as an isolated finding; however, the condition can be a manifestation of Laugier-Hunziker syndrome, Carney complex, and Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome.^1-3 When it occurs as an isolated finding, the patient can be reassured and treatment is unnecessary. Because genital lentiginosis may mimic the appearance of melanoma, it is important for physicians to differentiate the two and make a correct diagnosis. We present a case of genital lentiginosis that mimicked vulvar melanoma.

A 64-year-old woman was referred by her gynecologist to dermatology to rule out vulvar melanoma. The patient had a history of hypothyroidism and hypercholesterolemia but was otherwise in good health. Genital examination revealed asymptomatic pigmented macules and patches of unknown duration (Figure 1). Specimens were taken from 3 areas by punch biopsy to clarify the diagnosis. All 3 specimens showed identical features including basilar pigmentation, occasional melanophages in the papillary dermis, and no evidence of nests or pagetoid spread of atypical melanocytes (Figures 2 and 3). Histologic findings were diagnostic for genital lentiginosis. The patient was reassured, and no treatment was provided. At 6-month follow-up there was no change in clinical appearance.

Genital lentiginosis is characterized by brown lesions that can have a mottled appearance and often are associated with skip areas.¹ Lesions can be strikingly irregular and darkly pigmented.

Although the lesions of genital lentiginosis most often are isolated findings, they can be a clue to several uncommon syndromes such as autosomal-dominant Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome, which is associated with genital lentiginosis, intestinal polyposis, and macrocephaly.³ Vascular malformations, lipomatosis, verrucal keratoses, and acrochordons can occur. Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome and Cowden syndrome may share genetic linkage; mutations in the tumor suppressor PTEN (phosphatase and tensin homolog deleted on chromosome ten) has been implicated in both syndromes.⁴ Underlying Carney complex should be excluded when genital lentiginosis is encountered.

Genital lentiginosis is idiopathic in most instances, but reports of lesions occurring after annular lichen planus suggest a possible mechanism.⁵ The disappearance of lentigines after imatinib therapy suggests a role for c-kit, a receptor tyrosine kinase that is involved in intracellular signaling, in some cases.⁶ At times, lesions can simulate trichrome vitiligo or have a reticulate pattern.⁷

Men and women present at different points in the course of disease. Men often present with penile lesions 14 years after onset, on average; they notice a gradual increase in the size of lesions. Because women can have greater difficulty self-examining the genital region, they tend to present much later in the course but often within a few months after initial inspection.^1,8

Genital lentiginosis can mimic melanoma with nonhomogeneous pigmentation, asymmetry, and unilateral distribution, which makes dermoscopic assessment of colors helpful in narrowing the differential diagnosis. Melanoma is associated with combinations of gray, red, blue, and white, which are not found in genital lentiginosis.⁹

Biopsy of a genital lentigo is diagnostic, distinguishing the lesion from melanoma—failing to reveal the atypical melanocytes and pagetoid spread characteristic of melanoma in situ. Histologic findings can cause diagnostic difficulties when concurrent lichen sclerosus is associated with genital lentigines or nevi.¹⁰

Lentigines on sun-damaged skin or in the setting of xeroderma pigmentosum have been associated with melanoma,^11-13 but genital lentigines are not considered a form of precancerous melanosis. In women, early diagnosis is important when there is concern for melanoma because the prognosis for vulvar melanoma is improved in thin lesions.¹⁴

Other entities in the differential include secondary syphilis, which commonly presents as macules and scaly papules and can be found on mucosal surfaces such as the oral cavity,¹⁵ as well as Kaposi sarcoma, which is characterized by purplish, brown, or black macules, plaques, and nodules, more commonly in immunosuppressed patients.¹⁶

To avoid unwarranted concern and unnecessary surgery, dermatologists should be aware of genital lentigines and their characteristic presentation in adults.

To the Editor:

Genital lentiginosis (also known as mucosal melanotic macules, vulvar melanosis, penile melanosis, and penile lentigines) occurs in men and women.¹ Lesions present in adult life as multifocal, asymmetrical, pigmented patches that can have a mottled appearance or exhibit skip areas. The irregular appearance of the pigmented areas often raises concern for melanoma. Biopsy reveals increased pigmentation along the basal layer of the epidermis; the irregular distribution of single melanocytes and pagetoid spread typical of melanoma in situ is not identified.

Genital lentiginosis usually occurs as an isolated finding; however, the condition can be a manifestation of Laugier-Hunziker syndrome, Carney complex, and Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome.^1-3 When it occurs as an isolated finding, the patient can be reassured and treatment is unnecessary. Because genital lentiginosis may mimic the appearance of melanoma, it is important for physicians to differentiate the two and make a correct diagnosis. We present a case of genital lentiginosis that mimicked vulvar melanoma.

A 64-year-old woman was referred by her gynecologist to dermatology to rule out vulvar melanoma. The patient had a history of hypothyroidism and hypercholesterolemia but was otherwise in good health. Genital examination revealed asymptomatic pigmented macules and patches of unknown duration (Figure 1). Specimens were taken from 3 areas by punch biopsy to clarify the diagnosis. All 3 specimens showed identical features including basilar pigmentation, occasional melanophages in the papillary dermis, and no evidence of nests or pagetoid spread of atypical melanocytes (Figures 2 and 3). Histologic findings were diagnostic for genital lentiginosis. The patient was reassured, and no treatment was provided. At 6-month follow-up there was no change in clinical appearance.

Genital lentiginosis is characterized by brown lesions that can have a mottled appearance and often are associated with skip areas.¹ Lesions can be strikingly irregular and darkly pigmented.

Although the lesions of genital lentiginosis most often are isolated findings, they can be a clue to several uncommon syndromes such as autosomal-dominant Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome, which is associated with genital lentiginosis, intestinal polyposis, and macrocephaly.³ Vascular malformations, lipomatosis, verrucal keratoses, and acrochordons can occur. Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome and Cowden syndrome may share genetic linkage; mutations in the tumor suppressor PTEN (phosphatase and tensin homolog deleted on chromosome ten) has been implicated in both syndromes.⁴ Underlying Carney complex should be excluded when genital lentiginosis is encountered.

Genital lentiginosis is idiopathic in most instances, but reports of lesions occurring after annular lichen planus suggest a possible mechanism.⁵ The disappearance of lentigines after imatinib therapy suggests a role for c-kit, a receptor tyrosine kinase that is involved in intracellular signaling, in some cases.⁶ At times, lesions can simulate trichrome vitiligo or have a reticulate pattern.⁷

Men and women present at different points in the course of disease. Men often present with penile lesions 14 years after onset, on average; they notice a gradual increase in the size of lesions. Because women can have greater difficulty self-examining the genital region, they tend to present much later in the course but often within a few months after initial inspection.^1,8

Genital lentiginosis can mimic melanoma with nonhomogeneous pigmentation, asymmetry, and unilateral distribution, which makes dermoscopic assessment of colors helpful in narrowing the differential diagnosis. Melanoma is associated with combinations of gray, red, blue, and white, which are not found in genital lentiginosis.⁹

Biopsy of a genital lentigo is diagnostic, distinguishing the lesion from melanoma—failing to reveal the atypical melanocytes and pagetoid spread characteristic of melanoma in situ. Histologic findings can cause diagnostic difficulties when concurrent lichen sclerosus is associated with genital lentigines or nevi.¹⁰

Lentigines on sun-damaged skin or in the setting of xeroderma pigmentosum have been associated with melanoma,^11-13 but genital lentigines are not considered a form of precancerous melanosis. In women, early diagnosis is important when there is concern for melanoma because the prognosis for vulvar melanoma is improved in thin lesions.¹⁴

Other entities in the differential include secondary syphilis, which commonly presents as macules and scaly papules and can be found on mucosal surfaces such as the oral cavity,¹⁵ as well as Kaposi sarcoma, which is characterized by purplish, brown, or black macules, plaques, and nodules, more commonly in immunosuppressed patients.¹⁶

To avoid unwarranted concern and unnecessary surgery, dermatologists should be aware of genital lentigines and their characteristic presentation in adults.

To the Editor:

Genital lentiginosis (also known as mucosal melanotic macules, vulvar melanosis, penile melanosis, and penile lentigines) occurs in men and women.¹ Lesions present in adult life as multifocal, asymmetrical, pigmented patches that can have a mottled appearance or exhibit skip areas. The irregular appearance of the pigmented areas often raises concern for melanoma. Biopsy reveals increased pigmentation along the basal layer of the epidermis; the irregular distribution of single melanocytes and pagetoid spread typical of melanoma in situ is not identified.

Genital lentiginosis usually occurs as an isolated finding; however, the condition can be a manifestation of Laugier-Hunziker syndrome, Carney complex, and Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome.^1-3 When it occurs as an isolated finding, the patient can be reassured and treatment is unnecessary. Because genital lentiginosis may mimic the appearance of melanoma, it is important for physicians to differentiate the two and make a correct diagnosis. We present a case of genital lentiginosis that mimicked vulvar melanoma.

A 64-year-old woman was referred by her gynecologist to dermatology to rule out vulvar melanoma. The patient had a history of hypothyroidism and hypercholesterolemia but was otherwise in good health. Genital examination revealed asymptomatic pigmented macules and patches of unknown duration (Figure 1). Specimens were taken from 3 areas by punch biopsy to clarify the diagnosis. All 3 specimens showed identical features including basilar pigmentation, occasional melanophages in the papillary dermis, and no evidence of nests or pagetoid spread of atypical melanocytes (Figures 2 and 3). Histologic findings were diagnostic for genital lentiginosis. The patient was reassured, and no treatment was provided. At 6-month follow-up there was no change in clinical appearance.

Genital lentiginosis is characterized by brown lesions that can have a mottled appearance and often are associated with skip areas.¹ Lesions can be strikingly irregular and darkly pigmented.

Although the lesions of genital lentiginosis most often are isolated findings, they can be a clue to several uncommon syndromes such as autosomal-dominant Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome, which is associated with genital lentiginosis, intestinal polyposis, and macrocephaly.³ Vascular malformations, lipomatosis, verrucal keratoses, and acrochordons can occur. Bannayan-Riley-Ruvalcaba syndrome and Cowden syndrome may share genetic linkage; mutations in the tumor suppressor PTEN (phosphatase and tensin homolog deleted on chromosome ten) has been implicated in both syndromes.⁴ Underlying Carney complex should be excluded when genital lentiginosis is encountered.

Genital lentiginosis is idiopathic in most instances, but reports of lesions occurring after annular lichen planus suggest a possible mechanism.⁵ The disappearance of lentigines after imatinib therapy suggests a role for c-kit, a receptor tyrosine kinase that is involved in intracellular signaling, in some cases.⁶ At times, lesions can simulate trichrome vitiligo or have a reticulate pattern.⁷

Men and women present at different points in the course of disease. Men often present with penile lesions 14 years after onset, on average; they notice a gradual increase in the size of lesions. Because women can have greater difficulty self-examining the genital region, they tend to present much later in the course but often within a few months after initial inspection.^1,8

Genital lentiginosis can mimic melanoma with nonhomogeneous pigmentation, asymmetry, and unilateral distribution, which makes dermoscopic assessment of colors helpful in narrowing the differential diagnosis. Melanoma is associated with combinations of gray, red, blue, and white, which are not found in genital lentiginosis.⁹

Biopsy of a genital lentigo is diagnostic, distinguishing the lesion from melanoma—failing to reveal the atypical melanocytes and pagetoid spread characteristic of melanoma in situ. Histologic findings can cause diagnostic difficulties when concurrent lichen sclerosus is associated with genital lentigines or nevi.¹⁰

Lentigines on sun-damaged skin or in the setting of xeroderma pigmentosum have been associated with melanoma,^11-13 but genital lentigines are not considered a form of precancerous melanosis. In women, early diagnosis is important when there is concern for melanoma because the prognosis for vulvar melanoma is improved in thin lesions.¹⁴

Other entities in the differential include secondary syphilis, which commonly presents as macules and scaly papules and can be found on mucosal surfaces such as the oral cavity,¹⁵ as well as Kaposi sarcoma, which is characterized by purplish, brown, or black macules, plaques, and nodules, more commonly in immunosuppressed patients.¹⁶

To avoid unwarranted concern and unnecessary surgery, dermatologists should be aware of genital lentigines and their characteristic presentation in adults.

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonist medications are becoming more and more of a mainstay of both migraine prevention and acute treatment. Four CGRP monoclonal antibody medications and three oral CGRP antagonists are now available for prevention and acute treatment of migraine. When this class of medications was developed, many patients and providers were initially concerned regarding any potentially unanticipated long-term adverse events. The first CGRP antagonist medication, erenumab, was associated with constipation, and, although this has not been formally reported with other CGRP medications, there is some anecdotal evidence of gastrointestinal (GI) discomfort with both oral and other monoclonal antibody medications in this class. In 2021, erenumab was also reported to be associated with hypertension and a formal warning was issued for this.

Before CGRP was used for migraine prevention, it had been known to be a potent vasodilator. Although the randomized controlled trials (RCT) for all CGRP medications included a longitudinal review of blood pressure (BP) measures, none of those initial trials revealed an increased risk for hypertension or other cardiovascular events or concerns. Some of the initial trials even included patients at higher cardiovascular risk. Migraine itself is associated with an increased vascular risk; it is therefore extremely important to determine whether a potential treatment may be increasing this risk further.

In the study by de Vries and colleagues, all patients were started on either erenumab or fremanezumab and were included if they had a follow-up blood pressure measurement within 6 months. All patients had at least8 migraine days per month and had used four or more preventive medications. Patients taking erenumab were first started at 70 mg monthly and were optionally increased to 140 mg after 3 months. Fremanezumab was always given at a dose of 225 mg monthly (as opposed to 675 mg every 3 months). BP data were collected at baseline and followed up at every visit, with a maximum of 12 months of review. Patients were excluded if their baseline BP was measured while they were undergoing tapering an antihypertensive medication at the same time that they were starting the CGRP antagonist. Patients already treated for hypertension were included only if there were no changes to their hypertensive regimen.

Patients were also compared with a control group with a similar distribution in sex, age, and diagnosis, and who were not taking any migraine preventive medication that would affect their BP. Control group BP was also measured at least two different time points 1-3 months from baseline.

A total of 211 patients were enrolled: 109 in the erenumab group and 87 in the fremanezumab group. The erenumab group was also associated with an increase in both systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) (SBP ≤ 9 mm Hg; DBP ≤ 6.3 mm Hg). The fremanezumab group had a lower increase in SBP (1 mm Hg) and no increase in DBP. Nine patients were started on antihypertensive medications, five of them after the baseline BP recording only. There was no change over time in the control group.

As noted, CGRP has a potent vasodilatory effect. Although not proven, a theory has been posited that CGRP receptor antagonist medications are somewhat more likely to lead to systemic adverse effects than are ligand-blocking medications. This may, at least in part, explain why erenumab appears to have more associated GI discomfort and constipation as well as a vascular effect with hypertension. In light of these findings, it is absolutely necessary for the additional CGRP medications to also be studied for these potential risk factors.

With the advent of novel acute treatments for migraine, many providers ask themselves what the potential risks and benefits are for each new class of drugs developed and approved over the past few years. Johnston and colleagues reviewed five recently published RCT to compare risk-benefit profiles for lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant. Lasmiditan is the only medication in the ditan class, a serotonin (5HT-1F) receptor agonist medication approved for the acute treatment of migraine. Rimegepant and ubrogepant are oral CGRP antagonists.

Lasmiditan does have a potential risk for impairment while driving due to excessive sedation and dizziness; it is also more likely than the CGRP medications to lead to the development of medication overuse headache. The CGRP medications, however, are associated with a smaller responder rate for headache freedom at 2 hours. The investigators reviewed the data published in five RCT to develop a statistically based decision-making process that correlates with the number needed to treat vs the number needed to harm for all three of these medications. The number needed to treat is a statistically defined parameter that characterizes the number of patients that need to be treated with an intervention to achieve a positive event. The number needed to harm refers to an additional negative event relative to the reference treatment (placebo in the case of an RCT).

The reviewed studies compared multiple dosages of these medications. Efficacy outcomes were pain relief and pain freedom at 2 hours, sustained pain relief from 2 to 24 hours, and freedom from the most bothersome symptom at 2 hours. Safety outcomes were dizziness and nausea.

The number needed to treat was the lowest for 200 mg lasmiditan (twice the highest recommended acute dose), followed by 75 mg rimegepant. The number needed to harm was highest for 25 mg ubrogepant (half of the lowest recommended acute dose). Nausea was lowest for 75 mg rimegepant.

An individualized approach is always recommended when considering both preventive and acute treatments for migraine. It is definitely worth keeping these results in mind when discussing potential acute treatment options with patients. This is especially true when considering patients who may be more likely to experience either dizziness or nausea with other acute treatments. It is also worth individualizing a potential acute treatment when a patient experiences rapid-onset migraine symptoms. Further investigations into both acute and preventive treatments would enlighten and further individualize our clinical approaches.

Erenumab currently carries a prescriber warning for constipation. Although there has been some anecdotal evidence for constipation with other CGRP antagonists, this has never fully been investigated. Currently, the other CGRP medication options have fewer side effects and not all  are associated with constipation. Kudrow and colleagues sought to review the incidence of constipation, and GI motility in general, with both erenumab and galcanezumab. Their hypothesis was that a single dose of erenumab would be associated with delayed GI motility and a single dose of galcanezumab would not be.

This study was conducted as a multicenter trial with single-blinding. A total of 65 patients were enrolled and given either 140 mg erenumab or 240 mg galcanezumab (the loading dose). GI motility was measured via a wireless motility capsule at baseline before treatment and repeated at 2 weeks. This test is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for evaluation of gastric transit time in patients with suspected gastroparesis and for evaluation of colonic transit time in patients with chronic idiopathic constipation. Patients with prior GI symptoms were excluded, as were patients taking a tricyclic antidepressant or a calcium-channel blocker, owing to known constipation with these agents.

The primary endpoint in this study was change from a baseline colonic transit time 2 weeks after injection with the CGRP monoclonal antibody. Secondary endpoints included change from baseline in whole-gut transit time, gastric emptying time, small-bowel transfer time, and combined small- and large-bowel transfer time. The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) was also used, evaluating abdominal pain, reflux, indigestion, constipation, and diarrhea based on a 7-point response, ranging from no discomfort to very severe discomfort.

The primary endpoint of baseline change in colonic transit time was not statistically significant between the groups: A mean change of 5.8 hours was noted for erenumab and 5.4 hours for galcanezumab. Most secondary endpoints were also not statistically significantly different between the two groups. Small-bowel transit time was  decreased in the galcanezumab group. When the patient-reported scales were reviewed, spontaneous bowel movements decreased significantly in the erenumab group, a finding that was not seen in the galcanezumab group and was statistically significant. The GSRS also showed a small but statistically significant change in the erenumab group.

This study does appear to show a significant difference in the two CGRP antagonist medications. The full side-effect profiles of the four CGRP monoclonal antibodies and three oral CGRP blocking medications available remain unknown. Further head-to-head comparisons will allow better differentiation of these options and better individualization of patient care.

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonist medications are becoming more and more of a mainstay of both migraine prevention and acute treatment. Four CGRP monoclonal antibody medications and three oral CGRP antagonists are now available for prevention and acute treatment of migraine. When this class of medications was developed, many patients and providers were initially concerned regarding any potentially unanticipated long-term adverse events. The first CGRP antagonist medication, erenumab, was associated with constipation, and, although this has not been formally reported with other CGRP medications, there is some anecdotal evidence of gastrointestinal (GI) discomfort with both oral and other monoclonal antibody medications in this class. In 2021, erenumab was also reported to be associated with hypertension and a formal warning was issued for this.

Before CGRP was used for migraine prevention, it had been known to be a potent vasodilator. Although the randomized controlled trials (RCT) for all CGRP medications included a longitudinal review of blood pressure (BP) measures, none of those initial trials revealed an increased risk for hypertension or other cardiovascular events or concerns. Some of the initial trials even included patients at higher cardiovascular risk. Migraine itself is associated with an increased vascular risk; it is therefore extremely important to determine whether a potential treatment may be increasing this risk further.

In the study by de Vries and colleagues, all patients were started on either erenumab or fremanezumab and were included if they had a follow-up blood pressure measurement within 6 months. All patients had at least8 migraine days per month and had used four or more preventive medications. Patients taking erenumab were first started at 70 mg monthly and were optionally increased to 140 mg after 3 months. Fremanezumab was always given at a dose of 225 mg monthly (as opposed to 675 mg every 3 months). BP data were collected at baseline and followed up at every visit, with a maximum of 12 months of review. Patients were excluded if their baseline BP was measured while they were undergoing tapering an antihypertensive medication at the same time that they were starting the CGRP antagonist. Patients already treated for hypertension were included only if there were no changes to their hypertensive regimen.

Patients were also compared with a control group with a similar distribution in sex, age, and diagnosis, and who were not taking any migraine preventive medication that would affect their BP. Control group BP was also measured at least two different time points 1-3 months from baseline.

A total of 211 patients were enrolled: 109 in the erenumab group and 87 in the fremanezumab group. The erenumab group was also associated with an increase in both systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) (SBP ≤ 9 mm Hg; DBP ≤ 6.3 mm Hg). The fremanezumab group had a lower increase in SBP (1 mm Hg) and no increase in DBP. Nine patients were started on antihypertensive medications, five of them after the baseline BP recording only. There was no change over time in the control group.

As noted, CGRP has a potent vasodilatory effect. Although not proven, a theory has been posited that CGRP receptor antagonist medications are somewhat more likely to lead to systemic adverse effects than are ligand-blocking medications. This may, at least in part, explain why erenumab appears to have more associated GI discomfort and constipation as well as a vascular effect with hypertension. In light of these findings, it is absolutely necessary for the additional CGRP medications to also be studied for these potential risk factors.

With the advent of novel acute treatments for migraine, many providers ask themselves what the potential risks and benefits are for each new class of drugs developed and approved over the past few years. Johnston and colleagues reviewed five recently published RCT to compare risk-benefit profiles for lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant. Lasmiditan is the only medication in the ditan class, a serotonin (5HT-1F) receptor agonist medication approved for the acute treatment of migraine. Rimegepant and ubrogepant are oral CGRP antagonists.

Lasmiditan does have a potential risk for impairment while driving due to excessive sedation and dizziness; it is also more likely than the CGRP medications to lead to the development of medication overuse headache. The CGRP medications, however, are associated with a smaller responder rate for headache freedom at 2 hours. The investigators reviewed the data published in five RCT to develop a statistically based decision-making process that correlates with the number needed to treat vs the number needed to harm for all three of these medications. The number needed to treat is a statistically defined parameter that characterizes the number of patients that need to be treated with an intervention to achieve a positive event. The number needed to harm refers to an additional negative event relative to the reference treatment (placebo in the case of an RCT).

The reviewed studies compared multiple dosages of these medications. Efficacy outcomes were pain relief and pain freedom at 2 hours, sustained pain relief from 2 to 24 hours, and freedom from the most bothersome symptom at 2 hours. Safety outcomes were dizziness and nausea.

The number needed to treat was the lowest for 200 mg lasmiditan (twice the highest recommended acute dose), followed by 75 mg rimegepant. The number needed to harm was highest for 25 mg ubrogepant (half of the lowest recommended acute dose). Nausea was lowest for 75 mg rimegepant.

An individualized approach is always recommended when considering both preventive and acute treatments for migraine. It is definitely worth keeping these results in mind when discussing potential acute treatment options with patients. This is especially true when considering patients who may be more likely to experience either dizziness or nausea with other acute treatments. It is also worth individualizing a potential acute treatment when a patient experiences rapid-onset migraine symptoms. Further investigations into both acute and preventive treatments would enlighten and further individualize our clinical approaches.

Erenumab currently carries a prescriber warning for constipation. Although there has been some anecdotal evidence for constipation with other CGRP antagonists, this has never fully been investigated. Currently, the other CGRP medication options have fewer side effects and not all  are associated with constipation. Kudrow and colleagues sought to review the incidence of constipation, and GI motility in general, with both erenumab and galcanezumab. Their hypothesis was that a single dose of erenumab would be associated with delayed GI motility and a single dose of galcanezumab would not be.

This study was conducted as a multicenter trial with single-blinding. A total of 65 patients were enrolled and given either 140 mg erenumab or 240 mg galcanezumab (the loading dose). GI motility was measured via a wireless motility capsule at baseline before treatment and repeated at 2 weeks. This test is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for evaluation of gastric transit time in patients with suspected gastroparesis and for evaluation of colonic transit time in patients with chronic idiopathic constipation. Patients with prior GI symptoms were excluded, as were patients taking a tricyclic antidepressant or a calcium-channel blocker, owing to known constipation with these agents.

The primary endpoint in this study was change from a baseline colonic transit time 2 weeks after injection with the CGRP monoclonal antibody. Secondary endpoints included change from baseline in whole-gut transit time, gastric emptying time, small-bowel transfer time, and combined small- and large-bowel transfer time. The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) was also used, evaluating abdominal pain, reflux, indigestion, constipation, and diarrhea based on a 7-point response, ranging from no discomfort to very severe discomfort.

The primary endpoint of baseline change in colonic transit time was not statistically significant between the groups: A mean change of 5.8 hours was noted for erenumab and 5.4 hours for galcanezumab. Most secondary endpoints were also not statistically significantly different between the two groups. Small-bowel transit time was  decreased in the galcanezumab group. When the patient-reported scales were reviewed, spontaneous bowel movements decreased significantly in the erenumab group, a finding that was not seen in the galcanezumab group and was statistically significant. The GSRS also showed a small but statistically significant change in the erenumab group.

This study does appear to show a significant difference in the two CGRP antagonist medications. The full side-effect profiles of the four CGRP monoclonal antibodies and three oral CGRP blocking medications available remain unknown. Further head-to-head comparisons will allow better differentiation of these options and better individualization of patient care.

Calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP) antagonist medications are becoming more and more of a mainstay of both migraine prevention and acute treatment. Four CGRP monoclonal antibody medications and three oral CGRP antagonists are now available for prevention and acute treatment of migraine. When this class of medications was developed, many patients and providers were initially concerned regarding any potentially unanticipated long-term adverse events. The first CGRP antagonist medication, erenumab, was associated with constipation, and, although this has not been formally reported with other CGRP medications, there is some anecdotal evidence of gastrointestinal (GI) discomfort with both oral and other monoclonal antibody medications in this class. In 2021, erenumab was also reported to be associated with hypertension and a formal warning was issued for this.

Before CGRP was used for migraine prevention, it had been known to be a potent vasodilator. Although the randomized controlled trials (RCT) for all CGRP medications included a longitudinal review of blood pressure (BP) measures, none of those initial trials revealed an increased risk for hypertension or other cardiovascular events or concerns. Some of the initial trials even included patients at higher cardiovascular risk. Migraine itself is associated with an increased vascular risk; it is therefore extremely important to determine whether a potential treatment may be increasing this risk further.

In the study by de Vries and colleagues, all patients were started on either erenumab or fremanezumab and were included if they had a follow-up blood pressure measurement within 6 months. All patients had at least8 migraine days per month and had used four or more preventive medications. Patients taking erenumab were first started at 70 mg monthly and were optionally increased to 140 mg after 3 months. Fremanezumab was always given at a dose of 225 mg monthly (as opposed to 675 mg every 3 months). BP data were collected at baseline and followed up at every visit, with a maximum of 12 months of review. Patients were excluded if their baseline BP was measured while they were undergoing tapering an antihypertensive medication at the same time that they were starting the CGRP antagonist. Patients already treated for hypertension were included only if there were no changes to their hypertensive regimen.

Patients were also compared with a control group with a similar distribution in sex, age, and diagnosis, and who were not taking any migraine preventive medication that would affect their BP. Control group BP was also measured at least two different time points 1-3 months from baseline.

A total of 211 patients were enrolled: 109 in the erenumab group and 87 in the fremanezumab group. The erenumab group was also associated with an increase in both systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) (SBP ≤ 9 mm Hg; DBP ≤ 6.3 mm Hg). The fremanezumab group had a lower increase in SBP (1 mm Hg) and no increase in DBP. Nine patients were started on antihypertensive medications, five of them after the baseline BP recording only. There was no change over time in the control group.

As noted, CGRP has a potent vasodilatory effect. Although not proven, a theory has been posited that CGRP receptor antagonist medications are somewhat more likely to lead to systemic adverse effects than are ligand-blocking medications. This may, at least in part, explain why erenumab appears to have more associated GI discomfort and constipation as well as a vascular effect with hypertension. In light of these findings, it is absolutely necessary for the additional CGRP medications to also be studied for these potential risk factors.

With the advent of novel acute treatments for migraine, many providers ask themselves what the potential risks and benefits are for each new class of drugs developed and approved over the past few years. Johnston and colleagues reviewed five recently published RCT to compare risk-benefit profiles for lasmiditan, rimegepant, and ubrogepant. Lasmiditan is the only medication in the ditan class, a serotonin (5HT-1F) receptor agonist medication approved for the acute treatment of migraine. Rimegepant and ubrogepant are oral CGRP antagonists.

Lasmiditan does have a potential risk for impairment while driving due to excessive sedation and dizziness; it is also more likely than the CGRP medications to lead to the development of medication overuse headache. The CGRP medications, however, are associated with a smaller responder rate for headache freedom at 2 hours. The investigators reviewed the data published in five RCT to develop a statistically based decision-making process that correlates with the number needed to treat vs the number needed to harm for all three of these medications. The number needed to treat is a statistically defined parameter that characterizes the number of patients that need to be treated with an intervention to achieve a positive event. The number needed to harm refers to an additional negative event relative to the reference treatment (placebo in the case of an RCT).

The reviewed studies compared multiple dosages of these medications. Efficacy outcomes were pain relief and pain freedom at 2 hours, sustained pain relief from 2 to 24 hours, and freedom from the most bothersome symptom at 2 hours. Safety outcomes were dizziness and nausea.

The number needed to treat was the lowest for 200 mg lasmiditan (twice the highest recommended acute dose), followed by 75 mg rimegepant. The number needed to harm was highest for 25 mg ubrogepant (half of the lowest recommended acute dose). Nausea was lowest for 75 mg rimegepant.

An individualized approach is always recommended when considering both preventive and acute treatments for migraine. It is definitely worth keeping these results in mind when discussing potential acute treatment options with patients. This is especially true when considering patients who may be more likely to experience either dizziness or nausea with other acute treatments. It is also worth individualizing a potential acute treatment when a patient experiences rapid-onset migraine symptoms. Further investigations into both acute and preventive treatments would enlighten and further individualize our clinical approaches.

Erenumab currently carries a prescriber warning for constipation. Although there has been some anecdotal evidence for constipation with other CGRP antagonists, this has never fully been investigated. Currently, the other CGRP medication options have fewer side effects and not all  are associated with constipation. Kudrow and colleagues sought to review the incidence of constipation, and GI motility in general, with both erenumab and galcanezumab. Their hypothesis was that a single dose of erenumab would be associated with delayed GI motility and a single dose of galcanezumab would not be.

This study was conducted as a multicenter trial with single-blinding. A total of 65 patients were enrolled and given either 140 mg erenumab or 240 mg galcanezumab (the loading dose). GI motility was measured via a wireless motility capsule at baseline before treatment and repeated at 2 weeks. This test is approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for evaluation of gastric transit time in patients with suspected gastroparesis and for evaluation of colonic transit time in patients with chronic idiopathic constipation. Patients with prior GI symptoms were excluded, as were patients taking a tricyclic antidepressant or a calcium-channel blocker, owing to known constipation with these agents.

The primary endpoint in this study was change from a baseline colonic transit time 2 weeks after injection with the CGRP monoclonal antibody. Secondary endpoints included change from baseline in whole-gut transit time, gastric emptying time, small-bowel transfer time, and combined small- and large-bowel transfer time. The Gastrointestinal Symptom Rating Scale (GSRS) was also used, evaluating abdominal pain, reflux, indigestion, constipation, and diarrhea based on a 7-point response, ranging from no discomfort to very severe discomfort.

The primary endpoint of baseline change in colonic transit time was not statistically significant between the groups: A mean change of 5.8 hours was noted for erenumab and 5.4 hours for galcanezumab. Most secondary endpoints were also not statistically significantly different between the two groups. Small-bowel transit time was  decreased in the galcanezumab group. When the patient-reported scales were reviewed, spontaneous bowel movements decreased significantly in the erenumab group, a finding that was not seen in the galcanezumab group and was statistically significant. The GSRS also showed a small but statistically significant change in the erenumab group.

This study does appear to show a significant difference in the two CGRP antagonist medications. The full side-effect profiles of the four CGRP monoclonal antibodies and three oral CGRP blocking medications available remain unknown. Further head-to-head comparisons will allow better differentiation of these options and better individualization of patient care.

Courtesy of Jon Karnes, MD

The physician used a curette to perform a shave biopsy; pathology results indicated this was a poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). Cutaneous SCC is the second most common skin cancer in the United States (after basal cell carcinoma) and increases in frequency with age and cumulative sun damage. It is the most common skin cancer in patients who are Black.

SCC is frequently found on the head and neck, including the ear, but is less commonly found within the conchal bowl (as seen here). Often, SCC manifests as a rough plaque or dome-shaped papule in a sun damaged location, but it may occasionally manifest as an ulcer. While most patients are cured with outpatient surgery, an estimated 8000 patients will develop nodal metastasis and 3000 patients will die from the disease in the United States annually.¹ Chronically immunosuppressed patients, such as organ transplant recipients, are at high risk.

This patient underwent Mohs microsurgery (MMS) and clear margins were achieved after 2 stages. The resulting defect was repaired with a full-thickness graft from the postauricular fold. MMS is an excellent technique for keratinocyte carcinomas (SCC and basal cell carcinomas) of the head and neck, recurrent skin cancers on the trunk and extremities, high-risk cancer subtypes, and tumors with indistinct clinical borders. Follow-up for patients with SCCs includes full skin exams every 6 months for 2 years.

The American Academy of Dermatology offers a complimentary Mohs Surgery Appropriate Use Criteria App that assists in determining when Mohs surgery is appropriate, based on multiple tumor characteristics.

‌

Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Jonathan Karnes, MD (copyright retained). Dr. Karnes is the medical director of MDFMR Dermatology Services, Augusta, ME.

Courtesy of Jon Karnes, MD

The physician used a curette to perform a shave biopsy; pathology results indicated this was a poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). Cutaneous SCC is the second most common skin cancer in the United States (after basal cell carcinoma) and increases in frequency with age and cumulative sun damage. It is the most common skin cancer in patients who are Black.

SCC is frequently found on the head and neck, including the ear, but is less commonly found within the conchal bowl (as seen here). Often, SCC manifests as a rough plaque or dome-shaped papule in a sun damaged location, but it may occasionally manifest as an ulcer. While most patients are cured with outpatient surgery, an estimated 8000 patients will develop nodal metastasis and 3000 patients will die from the disease in the United States annually.¹ Chronically immunosuppressed patients, such as organ transplant recipients, are at high risk.

This patient underwent Mohs microsurgery (MMS) and clear margins were achieved after 2 stages. The resulting defect was repaired with a full-thickness graft from the postauricular fold. MMS is an excellent technique for keratinocyte carcinomas (SCC and basal cell carcinomas) of the head and neck, recurrent skin cancers on the trunk and extremities, high-risk cancer subtypes, and tumors with indistinct clinical borders. Follow-up for patients with SCCs includes full skin exams every 6 months for 2 years.

The American Academy of Dermatology offers a complimentary Mohs Surgery Appropriate Use Criteria App that assists in determining when Mohs surgery is appropriate, based on multiple tumor characteristics.

‌

Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Jonathan Karnes, MD (copyright retained). Dr. Karnes is the medical director of MDFMR Dermatology Services, Augusta, ME.

Courtesy of Jon Karnes, MD

The physician used a curette to perform a shave biopsy; pathology results indicated this was a poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma (SCC). Cutaneous SCC is the second most common skin cancer in the United States (after basal cell carcinoma) and increases in frequency with age and cumulative sun damage. It is the most common skin cancer in patients who are Black.

SCC is frequently found on the head and neck, including the ear, but is less commonly found within the conchal bowl (as seen here). Often, SCC manifests as a rough plaque or dome-shaped papule in a sun damaged location, but it may occasionally manifest as an ulcer. While most patients are cured with outpatient surgery, an estimated 8000 patients will develop nodal metastasis and 3000 patients will die from the disease in the United States annually.¹ Chronically immunosuppressed patients, such as organ transplant recipients, are at high risk.

This patient underwent Mohs microsurgery (MMS) and clear margins were achieved after 2 stages. The resulting defect was repaired with a full-thickness graft from the postauricular fold. MMS is an excellent technique for keratinocyte carcinomas (SCC and basal cell carcinomas) of the head and neck, recurrent skin cancers on the trunk and extremities, high-risk cancer subtypes, and tumors with indistinct clinical borders. Follow-up for patients with SCCs includes full skin exams every 6 months for 2 years.

The American Academy of Dermatology offers a complimentary Mohs Surgery Appropriate Use Criteria App that assists in determining when Mohs surgery is appropriate, based on multiple tumor characteristics.

‌

Photos and text for Photo Rounds Friday courtesy of Jonathan Karnes, MD (copyright retained). Dr. Karnes is the medical director of MDFMR Dermatology Services, Augusta, ME.

Mycetoma is a chronic subcutaneous infection due to fungal (eumycetoma) or aerobic actinomycetes (actinomycetoma) organisms. Clinical lesions develop from a granulomatous infiltrate organizing around the infectious organism. Patients can present with extensive subcutaneous nodularity and draining sinuses that can lead to deformation of the affected extremity. These infections are rare in developed countries, and the prevalence and incidence remain unknown. It has been reported that actinomycetes represent 60% of mycetoma cases worldwide, with the majority of cases in Central America from Nocardia (86%) and Actinomadura madurae (10%). ¹Gordonia species are aerobic, partially acid-fast, gram-positive actinobacteria that may comprise a notable minority of actinomycete isolates. ² The species Gordonia bronchialis is of particular interest as a human pathogen because of increasing reports of nosocomial infections. ^3,4 We describe a case of a mycetomalike infection due to G bronchialis in an immunocompetent patient with complete resolution after 3 months of antibiotics.

Case Report

An 86-year-old man presented to the emergency department with a pruritic rash on the right forearm. He had a history of chronic kidney disease, hypertension, and inverse psoriasis complicated by steroid atrophy. He reported trauma to the right antecubital fossa approximately 1 to 2 months prior from a car door; he received wound care over several weeks at an outside hospital. The initial wound healed completely, but he subsequently noticed erythema spreading down the forearm. At the current presentation, he was empirically treated with mid-potency topical steroids and cefuroxime for 7 days. Initial laboratory results were notable for a white blood cell count of 5.7×10³ cells/μL (reference range,3.7–8.4×10³ cells/μL) and a creatinine level of 1.5 mg/dL (reference range, 0.57–1.25 mg/dL). The patient returned to the emergency department 2 weeks later with spreading of the initial rash and worsening pruritus. Dermatologic evaluation revealed the patient was afebrile and had violaceous papules and nodules that coalesced into plaques on the right arm, with the largest measuring approximately 15 cm. Areas of superficial erosion and crusting were noted (Figure 1A). The patient denied constitutional symptoms and had no axillary or cervical lymphadenopathy. The differential initially included an atypical infection vs a neoplasm. Two 5-mm punch biopsies were performed, which demonstrated a suppurative granulomatous infiltrate in the dermis with extension into the subcutis (Figure 2A). Focal vacuolations within the dermis demonstrated aggregates of gram-positive pseudofilamentous organisms (Figures 2B and 2C). Aerobic tissue cultures grew G bronchialis that was susceptible to all antibiotics tested and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Fungal and mycobacterial cultures were negative. The patient was placed on amoxicillin 875 mg–clavulanate 125 mg twice daily for 3 weeks. However, he demonstrated progression of the rash, with increased induration and confluence of plaques on the forearm (Figure 1B). A repeat excisional biopsy was performed, and a tissue sample was sent for 16S ribosomal RNA sequencing identification. However, neither conventional cultures nor sequencing demonstrated evidence of G bronchialis or any other pathogen. Additionally, bacterial, fungal, and mycobacterial blood cultures were negative. Amoxicillin-clavulanate was stopped, and he was placed on trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for 2 weeks, then changed to linezolid (600 mg twice daily) due to continued lack of improvement of the rash. After 2 weeks of linezolid, the rash was slightly improved, but the patient had notable side effects (eg, nausea, mucositis). Therefore, he was switched back to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for another 6 weeks. Antibiotic therapy was discontinued after there was notable regression of indurated plaques (Figure 1C); he received more than 3 months of antibiotics in all. At 1 month after completion of antibiotic therapy, the patient had no evidence of recurrence.

Comment

Microbiology of Gordonia Species—Gordonia bronchialis originally was isolated in 1971 by Tsukamura et al⁵ from the sputum of patients with cavitary tuberculosis and bronchiectasis in Japan. Other Gordonia species (formerly Rhodococcus or Gordona) later were identified in soil, seawater, sediment, and wastewater. Gordonia bronchialis is a gram-positive aerobic actinomycete short rod that organizes in cordlike compact groups. It is weakly acid fast, nonmotile, and nonsporulating. Colonies exhibit pinkish-brown pigmentation. Our understanding of the clinical significance of this organism continues to evolve, and it is not always clearly pathogenic. Because Gordonia isolates may be dismissed as commensals or misidentified as Nocardia or Rhodococcus by routine biochemical tests, it is possible that infections may go undetected. Speciation requires gene sequencing; as our utilization of molecular methods has increased, the identification of clinically relevant aerobic actinomycetes, including Gordonia, has improved,⁶ and the following species have been recognized as pathogens: Gordonia araii, G bronchialis, Gordonia effusa, Gordonia otitidis, Gordonia polyisoprenivorans, Gordonia rubirpertincta, Gordonia sputi, and Gordonia terrae.⁷

Cases Reported in the Literature—A PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the term Gordonia bronchialis yielded 35 previously reported human cases of G bronchialis infection, most often associated with medical devices or procedures.^8-31 Eighteen of these cases were sternal surgical site infections in patients with a history of cardiac surgery,^3,4,12-16,30 including 2 outbreaks following coronary artery bypass grafting that were thought to be related to intraoperative transmission from a nurse.^3,4 Of the remaining cases, 12 were linked to a procedure or an indwelling catheter: 4 cases of peritonitis in the setting of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis^17,18,26,27; 3 cases of skin and soft tissue infection (1 at the site of a prior needle injection,¹⁰ 1 after acupuncture,¹¹ and 1 after breast reduction surgery²⁹); 1 case of ventriculitis in a premature neonate with an underlying intraventricular shunt¹⁹; 2 cases of pacemaker-induced endocarditis^20,28; 1 case of tibial osteomyelitis related to a bioresorbable polymer screw²¹; and 1 case of chronic endophthalmitis with underlying intraocular lens implants.²² The Table lists all cases of G bronchialis skin or surgical site infections encountered in our literature search as well as the treatment provided in each case.

Only 4 of these 35 cases of G bronchialis infections were skin and soft tissue infections. All 4 occurred in immunocompetent hosts, and 3 were associated with needle punctures or surgery. The fourth case involved a recurrent breast abscess that occurred in a patient without known risk factors or recent procedures.²³ Other Gordonia species have been associated with cutaneous infections, including Gordonia amicalis, G terrae, and recently Gordonia westfalica, with the latter 2 demonstrating actinomycetoma formation.^32-34 Our case is remarkable in that it represents actinomycetoma due to G bronchialis. Of note, our patient was immunocompetent and did not have any radiation or chronic lymphedema involving the affected extremity. However, his history of steroid-induced skin atrophy may have predisposed him to this rare infection.

Clinical Presentation—Classic mycetoma demonstrate organismal granules within the dermis, surrounded by a neutrophilic infiltrate, which is in turn surrounded by histiocytes and multinucleated giant cells. Periodic acid–Schiff and silver stains can identify fungal organisms, while Gram stain helps to elucidate bacterial etiologies.¹ In our patient, a biopsy revealed several dermal aggregates of pseudofilamentous gram-positive organisms surrounded by a neutrophilic and histiocytic infiltrate.⁸ Because this case presented over weeks to months rather than months to years, it progressed more rapidly than a classic mycetoma. However, the dermatologic and histologic features were consistent with mycetoma.

Management—General treatment of actinomycetoma requires identification of the causative organism and prolonged administration of antibiotics, typically in combination.^35-37 Most G bronchialis infections associated with surgical intervention or implants in the literature required surgical debridement and removal of contaminated material for clinical cure, with the exception of 3 cases of sternal wound infection and 1 case of peritonitis that recovered with antimicrobial therapy alone.^3,17 Combination therapy often was used, but monotherapy, particularly with a fluoroquinolone, has been reported. Susceptibility data are limited, but in general, Gordonia species appear susceptible to imipenem, ciprofloxacin, amikacin, gentamicin, and linezolid, with variable susceptibility to vancomycin (89% of isolates), third-generation cephalosporins (80%–90% of isolates), tetracyclines (≤85% of isolates), penicillin (≤70% of isolates), and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (≤65% of isolates).^{7,10,19,38-40} Although there are no standardized recommendations for the treatment of these infections, the most commonly used drugs to treat Gordonia are carbapenems and fluoroquinolones, with or without an aminoglycoside, followed by third-generation cephalosporins and vancomycin, depending on susceptibilities. Additional antibiotics (alone or in combination) that have previously been used with favorable outcomes include amoxicillin or amoxicillin-clavulanate, piperacillin-tazobactam, rifampicin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, minocycline, doxycycline, and daptomycin.

Our patient received amoxicillin-clavulanate, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and linezolid. We considered combination therapy but decided against it due to concern for toxicity, given his age and poor renal function. The antibiotic that was most important to his recovery was unclear; the patient insisted that his body, not antibiotics, deserved most of the credit for healing his arm. Although cultures and polymerase chain reaction assays were negative after 3 weeks of amoxicillin-clavulanate, the patient did not show clinical improvement—reasons could be because the antibiotic reduced but did not eliminate the bacterial burden, sampling error of the biopsy, or it takes much longer for the body to heal than it takes to kill the bacteria. Most likely a combination of factors was at play.

Conclusion

Gordonia bronchialis is an emerging cause of human infections typically occurring after trauma, inoculation, or surgery. Most infections are localized; however, the present case highlights the ability of this species to form a massive cutaneous infection. Treatment should be tailored to susceptibility, with close follow-up to ensure improvement and resolution. For clinicians encountering a similar case, we encourage biopsy prior to empiric antibiotics, as antibiotic therapy can decrease the yield of subsequent testing. Treatment should be guided by the clinical course and may need to last weeks to months. Combination therapy for Gordonia infections should be considered in severe cases, in cases presenting as actinomycetoma, in those not responding to therapy, or when the susceptibility profile is unknown or unreliable.

Acknowledgments—The authors thank this veteran for allowing us to participate in his care and to learn from his experience. He gave his consent for us to share his story and the photographs of the arm.

Mycetoma is a chronic subcutaneous infection due to fungal (eumycetoma) or aerobic actinomycetes (actinomycetoma) organisms. Clinical lesions develop from a granulomatous infiltrate organizing around the infectious organism. Patients can present with extensive subcutaneous nodularity and draining sinuses that can lead to deformation of the affected extremity. These infections are rare in developed countries, and the prevalence and incidence remain unknown. It has been reported that actinomycetes represent 60% of mycetoma cases worldwide, with the majority of cases in Central America from Nocardia (86%) and Actinomadura madurae (10%). ¹Gordonia species are aerobic, partially acid-fast, gram-positive actinobacteria that may comprise a notable minority of actinomycete isolates. ² The species Gordonia bronchialis is of particular interest as a human pathogen because of increasing reports of nosocomial infections. ^3,4 We describe a case of a mycetomalike infection due to G bronchialis in an immunocompetent patient with complete resolution after 3 months of antibiotics.

Case Report

An 86-year-old man presented to the emergency department with a pruritic rash on the right forearm. He had a history of chronic kidney disease, hypertension, and inverse psoriasis complicated by steroid atrophy. He reported trauma to the right antecubital fossa approximately 1 to 2 months prior from a car door; he received wound care over several weeks at an outside hospital. The initial wound healed completely, but he subsequently noticed erythema spreading down the forearm. At the current presentation, he was empirically treated with mid-potency topical steroids and cefuroxime for 7 days. Initial laboratory results were notable for a white blood cell count of 5.7×10³ cells/μL (reference range,3.7–8.4×10³ cells/μL) and a creatinine level of 1.5 mg/dL (reference range, 0.57–1.25 mg/dL). The patient returned to the emergency department 2 weeks later with spreading of the initial rash and worsening pruritus. Dermatologic evaluation revealed the patient was afebrile and had violaceous papules and nodules that coalesced into plaques on the right arm, with the largest measuring approximately 15 cm. Areas of superficial erosion and crusting were noted (Figure 1A). The patient denied constitutional symptoms and had no axillary or cervical lymphadenopathy. The differential initially included an atypical infection vs a neoplasm. Two 5-mm punch biopsies were performed, which demonstrated a suppurative granulomatous infiltrate in the dermis with extension into the subcutis (Figure 2A). Focal vacuolations within the dermis demonstrated aggregates of gram-positive pseudofilamentous organisms (Figures 2B and 2C). Aerobic tissue cultures grew G bronchialis that was susceptible to all antibiotics tested and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Fungal and mycobacterial cultures were negative. The patient was placed on amoxicillin 875 mg–clavulanate 125 mg twice daily for 3 weeks. However, he demonstrated progression of the rash, with increased induration and confluence of plaques on the forearm (Figure 1B). A repeat excisional biopsy was performed, and a tissue sample was sent for 16S ribosomal RNA sequencing identification. However, neither conventional cultures nor sequencing demonstrated evidence of G bronchialis or any other pathogen. Additionally, bacterial, fungal, and mycobacterial blood cultures were negative. Amoxicillin-clavulanate was stopped, and he was placed on trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for 2 weeks, then changed to linezolid (600 mg twice daily) due to continued lack of improvement of the rash. After 2 weeks of linezolid, the rash was slightly improved, but the patient had notable side effects (eg, nausea, mucositis). Therefore, he was switched back to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for another 6 weeks. Antibiotic therapy was discontinued after there was notable regression of indurated plaques (Figure 1C); he received more than 3 months of antibiotics in all. At 1 month after completion of antibiotic therapy, the patient had no evidence of recurrence.

Comment

Microbiology of Gordonia Species—Gordonia bronchialis originally was isolated in 1971 by Tsukamura et al⁵ from the sputum of patients with cavitary tuberculosis and bronchiectasis in Japan. Other Gordonia species (formerly Rhodococcus or Gordona) later were identified in soil, seawater, sediment, and wastewater. Gordonia bronchialis is a gram-positive aerobic actinomycete short rod that organizes in cordlike compact groups. It is weakly acid fast, nonmotile, and nonsporulating. Colonies exhibit pinkish-brown pigmentation. Our understanding of the clinical significance of this organism continues to evolve, and it is not always clearly pathogenic. Because Gordonia isolates may be dismissed as commensals or misidentified as Nocardia or Rhodococcus by routine biochemical tests, it is possible that infections may go undetected. Speciation requires gene sequencing; as our utilization of molecular methods has increased, the identification of clinically relevant aerobic actinomycetes, including Gordonia, has improved,⁶ and the following species have been recognized as pathogens: Gordonia araii, G bronchialis, Gordonia effusa, Gordonia otitidis, Gordonia polyisoprenivorans, Gordonia rubirpertincta, Gordonia sputi, and Gordonia terrae.⁷

Cases Reported in the Literature—A PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the term Gordonia bronchialis yielded 35 previously reported human cases of G bronchialis infection, most often associated with medical devices or procedures.^8-31 Eighteen of these cases were sternal surgical site infections in patients with a history of cardiac surgery,^3,4,12-16,30 including 2 outbreaks following coronary artery bypass grafting that were thought to be related to intraoperative transmission from a nurse.^3,4 Of the remaining cases, 12 were linked to a procedure or an indwelling catheter: 4 cases of peritonitis in the setting of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis^17,18,26,27; 3 cases of skin and soft tissue infection (1 at the site of a prior needle injection,¹⁰ 1 after acupuncture,¹¹ and 1 after breast reduction surgery²⁹); 1 case of ventriculitis in a premature neonate with an underlying intraventricular shunt¹⁹; 2 cases of pacemaker-induced endocarditis^20,28; 1 case of tibial osteomyelitis related to a bioresorbable polymer screw²¹; and 1 case of chronic endophthalmitis with underlying intraocular lens implants.²² The Table lists all cases of G bronchialis skin or surgical site infections encountered in our literature search as well as the treatment provided in each case.

Only 4 of these 35 cases of G bronchialis infections were skin and soft tissue infections. All 4 occurred in immunocompetent hosts, and 3 were associated with needle punctures or surgery. The fourth case involved a recurrent breast abscess that occurred in a patient without known risk factors or recent procedures.²³ Other Gordonia species have been associated with cutaneous infections, including Gordonia amicalis, G terrae, and recently Gordonia westfalica, with the latter 2 demonstrating actinomycetoma formation.^32-34 Our case is remarkable in that it represents actinomycetoma due to G bronchialis. Of note, our patient was immunocompetent and did not have any radiation or chronic lymphedema involving the affected extremity. However, his history of steroid-induced skin atrophy may have predisposed him to this rare infection.

Clinical Presentation—Classic mycetoma demonstrate organismal granules within the dermis, surrounded by a neutrophilic infiltrate, which is in turn surrounded by histiocytes and multinucleated giant cells. Periodic acid–Schiff and silver stains can identify fungal organisms, while Gram stain helps to elucidate bacterial etiologies.¹ In our patient, a biopsy revealed several dermal aggregates of pseudofilamentous gram-positive organisms surrounded by a neutrophilic and histiocytic infiltrate.⁸ Because this case presented over weeks to months rather than months to years, it progressed more rapidly than a classic mycetoma. However, the dermatologic and histologic features were consistent with mycetoma.

Management—General treatment of actinomycetoma requires identification of the causative organism and prolonged administration of antibiotics, typically in combination.^35-37 Most G bronchialis infections associated with surgical intervention or implants in the literature required surgical debridement and removal of contaminated material for clinical cure, with the exception of 3 cases of sternal wound infection and 1 case of peritonitis that recovered with antimicrobial therapy alone.^3,17 Combination therapy often was used, but monotherapy, particularly with a fluoroquinolone, has been reported. Susceptibility data are limited, but in general, Gordonia species appear susceptible to imipenem, ciprofloxacin, amikacin, gentamicin, and linezolid, with variable susceptibility to vancomycin (89% of isolates), third-generation cephalosporins (80%–90% of isolates), tetracyclines (≤85% of isolates), penicillin (≤70% of isolates), and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (≤65% of isolates).^{7,10,19,38-40} Although there are no standardized recommendations for the treatment of these infections, the most commonly used drugs to treat Gordonia are carbapenems and fluoroquinolones, with or without an aminoglycoside, followed by third-generation cephalosporins and vancomycin, depending on susceptibilities. Additional antibiotics (alone or in combination) that have previously been used with favorable outcomes include amoxicillin or amoxicillin-clavulanate, piperacillin-tazobactam, rifampicin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, minocycline, doxycycline, and daptomycin.

Our patient received amoxicillin-clavulanate, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and linezolid. We considered combination therapy but decided against it due to concern for toxicity, given his age and poor renal function. The antibiotic that was most important to his recovery was unclear; the patient insisted that his body, not antibiotics, deserved most of the credit for healing his arm. Although cultures and polymerase chain reaction assays were negative after 3 weeks of amoxicillin-clavulanate, the patient did not show clinical improvement—reasons could be because the antibiotic reduced but did not eliminate the bacterial burden, sampling error of the biopsy, or it takes much longer for the body to heal than it takes to kill the bacteria. Most likely a combination of factors was at play.

Conclusion

Gordonia bronchialis is an emerging cause of human infections typically occurring after trauma, inoculation, or surgery. Most infections are localized; however, the present case highlights the ability of this species to form a massive cutaneous infection. Treatment should be tailored to susceptibility, with close follow-up to ensure improvement and resolution. For clinicians encountering a similar case, we encourage biopsy prior to empiric antibiotics, as antibiotic therapy can decrease the yield of subsequent testing. Treatment should be guided by the clinical course and may need to last weeks to months. Combination therapy for Gordonia infections should be considered in severe cases, in cases presenting as actinomycetoma, in those not responding to therapy, or when the susceptibility profile is unknown or unreliable.

Acknowledgments—The authors thank this veteran for allowing us to participate in his care and to learn from his experience. He gave his consent for us to share his story and the photographs of the arm.

Mycetoma is a chronic subcutaneous infection due to fungal (eumycetoma) or aerobic actinomycetes (actinomycetoma) organisms. Clinical lesions develop from a granulomatous infiltrate organizing around the infectious organism. Patients can present with extensive subcutaneous nodularity and draining sinuses that can lead to deformation of the affected extremity. These infections are rare in developed countries, and the prevalence and incidence remain unknown. It has been reported that actinomycetes represent 60% of mycetoma cases worldwide, with the majority of cases in Central America from Nocardia (86%) and Actinomadura madurae (10%). ¹Gordonia species are aerobic, partially acid-fast, gram-positive actinobacteria that may comprise a notable minority of actinomycete isolates. ² The species Gordonia bronchialis is of particular interest as a human pathogen because of increasing reports of nosocomial infections. ^3,4 We describe a case of a mycetomalike infection due to G bronchialis in an immunocompetent patient with complete resolution after 3 months of antibiotics.

Case Report

An 86-year-old man presented to the emergency department with a pruritic rash on the right forearm. He had a history of chronic kidney disease, hypertension, and inverse psoriasis complicated by steroid atrophy. He reported trauma to the right antecubital fossa approximately 1 to 2 months prior from a car door; he received wound care over several weeks at an outside hospital. The initial wound healed completely, but he subsequently noticed erythema spreading down the forearm. At the current presentation, he was empirically treated with mid-potency topical steroids and cefuroxime for 7 days. Initial laboratory results were notable for a white blood cell count of 5.7×10³ cells/μL (reference range,3.7–8.4×10³ cells/μL) and a creatinine level of 1.5 mg/dL (reference range, 0.57–1.25 mg/dL). The patient returned to the emergency department 2 weeks later with spreading of the initial rash and worsening pruritus. Dermatologic evaluation revealed the patient was afebrile and had violaceous papules and nodules that coalesced into plaques on the right arm, with the largest measuring approximately 15 cm. Areas of superficial erosion and crusting were noted (Figure 1A). The patient denied constitutional symptoms and had no axillary or cervical lymphadenopathy. The differential initially included an atypical infection vs a neoplasm. Two 5-mm punch biopsies were performed, which demonstrated a suppurative granulomatous infiltrate in the dermis with extension into the subcutis (Figure 2A). Focal vacuolations within the dermis demonstrated aggregates of gram-positive pseudofilamentous organisms (Figures 2B and 2C). Aerobic tissue cultures grew G bronchialis that was susceptible to all antibiotics tested and Staphylococcus epidermidis. Fungal and mycobacterial cultures were negative. The patient was placed on amoxicillin 875 mg–clavulanate 125 mg twice daily for 3 weeks. However, he demonstrated progression of the rash, with increased induration and confluence of plaques on the forearm (Figure 1B). A repeat excisional biopsy was performed, and a tissue sample was sent for 16S ribosomal RNA sequencing identification. However, neither conventional cultures nor sequencing demonstrated evidence of G bronchialis or any other pathogen. Additionally, bacterial, fungal, and mycobacterial blood cultures were negative. Amoxicillin-clavulanate was stopped, and he was placed on trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for 2 weeks, then changed to linezolid (600 mg twice daily) due to continued lack of improvement of the rash. After 2 weeks of linezolid, the rash was slightly improved, but the patient had notable side effects (eg, nausea, mucositis). Therefore, he was switched back to trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole for another 6 weeks. Antibiotic therapy was discontinued after there was notable regression of indurated plaques (Figure 1C); he received more than 3 months of antibiotics in all. At 1 month after completion of antibiotic therapy, the patient had no evidence of recurrence.

Comment

Microbiology of Gordonia Species—Gordonia bronchialis originally was isolated in 1971 by Tsukamura et al⁵ from the sputum of patients with cavitary tuberculosis and bronchiectasis in Japan. Other Gordonia species (formerly Rhodococcus or Gordona) later were identified in soil, seawater, sediment, and wastewater. Gordonia bronchialis is a gram-positive aerobic actinomycete short rod that organizes in cordlike compact groups. It is weakly acid fast, nonmotile, and nonsporulating. Colonies exhibit pinkish-brown pigmentation. Our understanding of the clinical significance of this organism continues to evolve, and it is not always clearly pathogenic. Because Gordonia isolates may be dismissed as commensals or misidentified as Nocardia or Rhodococcus by routine biochemical tests, it is possible that infections may go undetected. Speciation requires gene sequencing; as our utilization of molecular methods has increased, the identification of clinically relevant aerobic actinomycetes, including Gordonia, has improved,⁶ and the following species have been recognized as pathogens: Gordonia araii, G bronchialis, Gordonia effusa, Gordonia otitidis, Gordonia polyisoprenivorans, Gordonia rubirpertincta, Gordonia sputi, and Gordonia terrae.⁷

Cases Reported in the Literature—A PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the term Gordonia bronchialis yielded 35 previously reported human cases of G bronchialis infection, most often associated with medical devices or procedures.^8-31 Eighteen of these cases were sternal surgical site infections in patients with a history of cardiac surgery,^3,4,12-16,30 including 2 outbreaks following coronary artery bypass grafting that were thought to be related to intraoperative transmission from a nurse.^3,4 Of the remaining cases, 12 were linked to a procedure or an indwelling catheter: 4 cases of peritonitis in the setting of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis^17,18,26,27; 3 cases of skin and soft tissue infection (1 at the site of a prior needle injection,¹⁰ 1 after acupuncture,¹¹ and 1 after breast reduction surgery²⁹); 1 case of ventriculitis in a premature neonate with an underlying intraventricular shunt¹⁹; 2 cases of pacemaker-induced endocarditis^20,28; 1 case of tibial osteomyelitis related to a bioresorbable polymer screw²¹; and 1 case of chronic endophthalmitis with underlying intraocular lens implants.²² The Table lists all cases of G bronchialis skin or surgical site infections encountered in our literature search as well as the treatment provided in each case.

Only 4 of these 35 cases of G bronchialis infections were skin and soft tissue infections. All 4 occurred in immunocompetent hosts, and 3 were associated with needle punctures or surgery. The fourth case involved a recurrent breast abscess that occurred in a patient without known risk factors or recent procedures.²³ Other Gordonia species have been associated with cutaneous infections, including Gordonia amicalis, G terrae, and recently Gordonia westfalica, with the latter 2 demonstrating actinomycetoma formation.^32-34 Our case is remarkable in that it represents actinomycetoma due to G bronchialis. Of note, our patient was immunocompetent and did not have any radiation or chronic lymphedema involving the affected extremity. However, his history of steroid-induced skin atrophy may have predisposed him to this rare infection.

Clinical Presentation—Classic mycetoma demonstrate organismal granules within the dermis, surrounded by a neutrophilic infiltrate, which is in turn surrounded by histiocytes and multinucleated giant cells. Periodic acid–Schiff and silver stains can identify fungal organisms, while Gram stain helps to elucidate bacterial etiologies.¹ In our patient, a biopsy revealed several dermal aggregates of pseudofilamentous gram-positive organisms surrounded by a neutrophilic and histiocytic infiltrate.⁸ Because this case presented over weeks to months rather than months to years, it progressed more rapidly than a classic mycetoma. However, the dermatologic and histologic features were consistent with mycetoma.

Management—General treatment of actinomycetoma requires identification of the causative organism and prolonged administration of antibiotics, typically in combination.^35-37 Most G bronchialis infections associated with surgical intervention or implants in the literature required surgical debridement and removal of contaminated material for clinical cure, with the exception of 3 cases of sternal wound infection and 1 case of peritonitis that recovered with antimicrobial therapy alone.^3,17 Combination therapy often was used, but monotherapy, particularly with a fluoroquinolone, has been reported. Susceptibility data are limited, but in general, Gordonia species appear susceptible to imipenem, ciprofloxacin, amikacin, gentamicin, and linezolid, with variable susceptibility to vancomycin (89% of isolates), third-generation cephalosporins (80%–90% of isolates), tetracyclines (≤85% of isolates), penicillin (≤70% of isolates), and trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole (≤65% of isolates).^{7,10,19,38-40} Although there are no standardized recommendations for the treatment of these infections, the most commonly used drugs to treat Gordonia are carbapenems and fluoroquinolones, with or without an aminoglycoside, followed by third-generation cephalosporins and vancomycin, depending on susceptibilities. Additional antibiotics (alone or in combination) that have previously been used with favorable outcomes include amoxicillin or amoxicillin-clavulanate, piperacillin-tazobactam, rifampicin, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, minocycline, doxycycline, and daptomycin.

Our patient received amoxicillin-clavulanate, trimethoprim-sulfamethoxazole, and linezolid. We considered combination therapy but decided against it due to concern for toxicity, given his age and poor renal function. The antibiotic that was most important to his recovery was unclear; the patient insisted that his body, not antibiotics, deserved most of the credit for healing his arm. Although cultures and polymerase chain reaction assays were negative after 3 weeks of amoxicillin-clavulanate, the patient did not show clinical improvement—reasons could be because the antibiotic reduced but did not eliminate the bacterial burden, sampling error of the biopsy, or it takes much longer for the body to heal than it takes to kill the bacteria. Most likely a combination of factors was at play.

Conclusion

Gordonia bronchialis is an emerging cause of human infections typically occurring after trauma, inoculation, or surgery. Most infections are localized; however, the present case highlights the ability of this species to form a massive cutaneous infection. Treatment should be tailored to susceptibility, with close follow-up to ensure improvement and resolution. For clinicians encountering a similar case, we encourage biopsy prior to empiric antibiotics, as antibiotic therapy can decrease the yield of subsequent testing. Treatment should be guided by the clinical course and may need to last weeks to months. Combination therapy for Gordonia infections should be considered in severe cases, in cases presenting as actinomycetoma, in those not responding to therapy, or when the susceptibility profile is unknown or unreliable.

Acknowledgments—The authors thank this veteran for allowing us to participate in his care and to learn from his experience. He gave his consent for us to share his story and the photographs of the arm.

The role of micronutrients in the hair follicle cycle is not fully understood; thus deficiency and/or excess of certain micronutrients may be a modifiable risk factor associated with the development and/or treatment of some types of hair loss and therefore may be included in the workup during an alopecia consultation.

Hereditary hemochromatosis (HHC) is the most common genetic disorder identified in White individuals, with a worldwide prevalence of 1 in 220 to 1 in 250 individuals for a homozygous mutation. It most commonly affects individuals of Northern European descent.¹ Men usually present in the fourth to sixth decades of life, while women usually develop symptoms after menopause, as pregnancy and menstruation delay the onset of the disease.² Early symptoms of HHC include fatigue, joint pain, abdominal pain, and weight loss. Men are more likely to develop complications; in fact, 1 in 10 men with HHC will develop severe liver disease.³ As the disease progresses, affected individuals can present with cardiomyopathy (restrictive and dilated), cirrhosis, hypogonadism (usually hypogonadotrophic), arthropathy, diabetes mellitus, hepatomegaly, hepatic cirrhosis, and primary liver cancer (eg, hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma).² Approximately 90% of patients with HHC present with hyperpigmentation at the time of diagnosis.⁴ Thinning or loss of hair is another finding in HHC, primarily reported in the axillae and pubic regions, and is ascribed to hepatotesticular insufficiency.⁵

Alopecia areata (AA) is the most common cause of autoimmune, inflammation-induced hair loss, with a calculated lifetime risk of 2%.⁶ This disease manifests as loss of hair in well-circumscribed patches of skin, most commonly on the scalp; AA also may affect other hair-bearing sites on the body. It is associated with an increased risk for other autoimmune disorders, such as psoriasis, thyroid disease, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, and vitiligo.⁷

Alopecia areata is induced by an inflammatory infiltrate of CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T lymphocytes around hair follicles in the anagen stage, the active growth phase.⁸ Although the diagnosis is clinical, some clinicians order laboratory thyroid studies to investigate conditions that may be associated with AA. Common treatments include topical, intralesional, and/or systemic corticosteroids; contact immunotherapy; topical and more recently oral minoxidil; phototherapy; and topical and systemic JAK inhibitors, including tofacitinib.^4,9

We reviewed the medical records of 533 patients who were seen in The University of Texas Southwestern (Dallas, Texas) dermatology clinic from January 2015 through January 2020 and were diagnosed with AA. We examined their demographic data and medical history. We sought to determine any relationship between various types of alopecia and certain micronutrient levels through laboratory test results. Ferritin and iron saturation studies were evaluated. We report 4 cases of HHC concurrent with AA, of which 2 HHC diagnoses were uncovered through iron studies as part of the alopecia evaluation.

Case Reports

Patient 1—A 55-year-old White woman presented to the clinic for an alopecia consultation. She had a medical history of hypothyroidism and AA that was treated unsuccessfully with triamcinolone acetonide steroid injections; topical minoxidil; topical steroids; and systemic steroids, specifically oral prednisone. Following evaluation, she successfully transitioned to treatment with oral tofacitinib and continued to do well on tofacitinib.

The patient’s alopecia workup revealed a ferritin level of 245 ng/mL (reference range, 13–150 ng/mL) and iron saturation of 60% (reference range, 20%–50%). She was referred to the hematology department for further evaluation and was diagnosed with HHC. Genetic testing revealed a heterozygous H63D mutation; therapeutic phlebotomy was recommended. Her sister also was recently diagnosed with HHC.

Patient 2—A 55-year-old White man was referred for evaluation and treatment of alopecia universalis. He had a medical history of skin cancer and vitiligo. He attempted contact immunotherapy with diphenylcyclopropenone scalp treatment but stopped due to intolerable inflammation. Intervention with a topical steroid and topical minoxidil was unsuccessful, but use of triamcinolone acetonide steroid injection on the scalp and topical bimatoprost 0.03% on the eyebrows produced satisfactory results.

The patient’s alopecia workup revealed a ferritin level of 422 ng/mL (reference range, 30–400 ng/mL), which prompted a hematology consultation for further evaluation. Notably, the patient ate red meat several times a week, used iron skillets, and denied receiving blood transfusions. His social habits included 3 alcoholic beverages a night, 5 days a week. Ultrasonography of the liver was recommended to assess potential damage from iron overload and alcohol consumption; the results suggested chronic liver disease, not definitive for cirrhosis, and no evidence of hepatocellular carcinoma. Genetic analysis later revealed the heterozygous H63D variant; therapeutic phlebotomy was recommended.

Patient 3—A 22-year-old White man presented with AA involving his facial beard. He had a medical history of vitiligo and psoriasis and a family history of AA as well as other autoimmune diseases including Hashimoto thyroiditis, psoriasis, eczema, and autoimmune hepatitis. Diphenylcyclopropenone treatment was not successful.

Laboratory studies revealed mildly elevated transaminase and ferritin levels. The patient also presented to the gastroenterologist for evaluation of abdominal pain. Subsequent hematology evaluation confirmed the presence of compound heterozygous C282Y and H63D mutations in the HFE gene, and the patient’s mother was later determined to be homozygous for the C282Y mutation with no elevated ferritin level. The patient’s ferritin level at diagnosis was approximately 500 ng/mL (reference range, 22–322 ng/mL); he required a modest number of therapeutic phlebotomies to normalize his ferritin level.

Patient 4—A 62-year-old White woman presented for evaluation and treatment of patchy hair loss on the scalp of 7 months’ duration. She was subsequently diagnosed with AA. After unsuccessful treatment with a triamcinolone acetonide steroid injection, topical immunotherapy with diphenylcyclopropenone was recommended. The patient achieved full hair regrowth after 35 treatments administered at 3-week intervals.

The patient had a medical history of HHC, including homozygosity for the C282Y mutation, and a family history of HHC in 1 sister. Treatment was therapeutic phlebotomy.

Comment

HHC in the Setting of AA—We presented 4 White patients with both HHC and AA. A PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the terms HHC and AA yielded only 1 other reported case of newly identified HHC in a 56-year-old man who presented with pigmented purpuric dermatitis and AA that affected the beard.¹⁰ Because HHC is the most common genetic disorder identified in White individuals and has a varied clinical presentation, the documentation of AA may be an important cutaneous clue to help clinicians diagnose HHC early.

Iron Overload in Patients With HHC—The genetic association between HHC and AA, if any, is unknown. What is known is that iron overload can catalyze reactive oxygen species, which can overwhelm cellular antioxidant capacities at particular levels and cause injury to its constituents.¹¹ Data show that the levels of oxidative stress are elevated in the scalp of patients with AA compared to controls and increased 2-fold during the early phase of disease vs late-phase disease.¹² Thus, it is possible that increased iron levels in HHC may contribute to AA in genetically susceptible individuals by direct toxicity that ultimately results in the AA hair disorder that is CD8⁺ T-cell mediated.

Data show that 78% (31/40) of men and 36% (14/39) of women identified with homozygous C282Y mutations determined from family genetic analyses exhibited iron overload.¹³ In general, a normal life expectancy is possible for patients promptly treated with appropriate therapeutic phlebotomies.¹⁴ Thus, early diagnosis and appropriate therapy can prevent consequences of iron overload, which include cirrhosis, diabetes mellitus, and cardiomyopathy.¹³Iron Screening in the Alopecia Workup—Our cases illustrate how iron screening tests as part of the alopecia workup identified a cohort of White patients with iron overload and subsequently led to an early diagnosis of HHC. The calculated 2% lifetime risk for developing AA highlights the importance of evaluating iron status as part of the AA workup, particularly for White men, and the potential health benefit from early diagnosis of HHC. Limitations of this case series included its retrospective nature and small patient number.

The role of micronutrients in the hair follicle cycle is not fully understood; thus deficiency and/or excess of certain micronutrients may be a modifiable risk factor associated with the development and/or treatment of some types of hair loss and therefore may be included in the workup during an alopecia consultation.

Hereditary hemochromatosis (HHC) is the most common genetic disorder identified in White individuals, with a worldwide prevalence of 1 in 220 to 1 in 250 individuals for a homozygous mutation. It most commonly affects individuals of Northern European descent.¹ Men usually present in the fourth to sixth decades of life, while women usually develop symptoms after menopause, as pregnancy and menstruation delay the onset of the disease.² Early symptoms of HHC include fatigue, joint pain, abdominal pain, and weight loss. Men are more likely to develop complications; in fact, 1 in 10 men with HHC will develop severe liver disease.³ As the disease progresses, affected individuals can present with cardiomyopathy (restrictive and dilated), cirrhosis, hypogonadism (usually hypogonadotrophic), arthropathy, diabetes mellitus, hepatomegaly, hepatic cirrhosis, and primary liver cancer (eg, hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma).² Approximately 90% of patients with HHC present with hyperpigmentation at the time of diagnosis.⁴ Thinning or loss of hair is another finding in HHC, primarily reported in the axillae and pubic regions, and is ascribed to hepatotesticular insufficiency.⁵

Alopecia areata (AA) is the most common cause of autoimmune, inflammation-induced hair loss, with a calculated lifetime risk of 2%.⁶ This disease manifests as loss of hair in well-circumscribed patches of skin, most commonly on the scalp; AA also may affect other hair-bearing sites on the body. It is associated with an increased risk for other autoimmune disorders, such as psoriasis, thyroid disease, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, and vitiligo.⁷

Alopecia areata is induced by an inflammatory infiltrate of CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T lymphocytes around hair follicles in the anagen stage, the active growth phase.⁸ Although the diagnosis is clinical, some clinicians order laboratory thyroid studies to investigate conditions that may be associated with AA. Common treatments include topical, intralesional, and/or systemic corticosteroids; contact immunotherapy; topical and more recently oral minoxidil; phototherapy; and topical and systemic JAK inhibitors, including tofacitinib.^4,9

We reviewed the medical records of 533 patients who were seen in The University of Texas Southwestern (Dallas, Texas) dermatology clinic from January 2015 through January 2020 and were diagnosed with AA. We examined their demographic data and medical history. We sought to determine any relationship between various types of alopecia and certain micronutrient levels through laboratory test results. Ferritin and iron saturation studies were evaluated. We report 4 cases of HHC concurrent with AA, of which 2 HHC diagnoses were uncovered through iron studies as part of the alopecia evaluation.

Case Reports

Patient 1—A 55-year-old White woman presented to the clinic for an alopecia consultation. She had a medical history of hypothyroidism and AA that was treated unsuccessfully with triamcinolone acetonide steroid injections; topical minoxidil; topical steroids; and systemic steroids, specifically oral prednisone. Following evaluation, she successfully transitioned to treatment with oral tofacitinib and continued to do well on tofacitinib.

The patient’s alopecia workup revealed a ferritin level of 245 ng/mL (reference range, 13–150 ng/mL) and iron saturation of 60% (reference range, 20%–50%). She was referred to the hematology department for further evaluation and was diagnosed with HHC. Genetic testing revealed a heterozygous H63D mutation; therapeutic phlebotomy was recommended. Her sister also was recently diagnosed with HHC.

Patient 2—A 55-year-old White man was referred for evaluation and treatment of alopecia universalis. He had a medical history of skin cancer and vitiligo. He attempted contact immunotherapy with diphenylcyclopropenone scalp treatment but stopped due to intolerable inflammation. Intervention with a topical steroid and topical minoxidil was unsuccessful, but use of triamcinolone acetonide steroid injection on the scalp and topical bimatoprost 0.03% on the eyebrows produced satisfactory results.

The patient’s alopecia workup revealed a ferritin level of 422 ng/mL (reference range, 30–400 ng/mL), which prompted a hematology consultation for further evaluation. Notably, the patient ate red meat several times a week, used iron skillets, and denied receiving blood transfusions. His social habits included 3 alcoholic beverages a night, 5 days a week. Ultrasonography of the liver was recommended to assess potential damage from iron overload and alcohol consumption; the results suggested chronic liver disease, not definitive for cirrhosis, and no evidence of hepatocellular carcinoma. Genetic analysis later revealed the heterozygous H63D variant; therapeutic phlebotomy was recommended.

Patient 3—A 22-year-old White man presented with AA involving his facial beard. He had a medical history of vitiligo and psoriasis and a family history of AA as well as other autoimmune diseases including Hashimoto thyroiditis, psoriasis, eczema, and autoimmune hepatitis. Diphenylcyclopropenone treatment was not successful.

Laboratory studies revealed mildly elevated transaminase and ferritin levels. The patient also presented to the gastroenterologist for evaluation of abdominal pain. Subsequent hematology evaluation confirmed the presence of compound heterozygous C282Y and H63D mutations in the HFE gene, and the patient’s mother was later determined to be homozygous for the C282Y mutation with no elevated ferritin level. The patient’s ferritin level at diagnosis was approximately 500 ng/mL (reference range, 22–322 ng/mL); he required a modest number of therapeutic phlebotomies to normalize his ferritin level.

Patient 4—A 62-year-old White woman presented for evaluation and treatment of patchy hair loss on the scalp of 7 months’ duration. She was subsequently diagnosed with AA. After unsuccessful treatment with a triamcinolone acetonide steroid injection, topical immunotherapy with diphenylcyclopropenone was recommended. The patient achieved full hair regrowth after 35 treatments administered at 3-week intervals.

The patient had a medical history of HHC, including homozygosity for the C282Y mutation, and a family history of HHC in 1 sister. Treatment was therapeutic phlebotomy.

Comment

HHC in the Setting of AA—We presented 4 White patients with both HHC and AA. A PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the terms HHC and AA yielded only 1 other reported case of newly identified HHC in a 56-year-old man who presented with pigmented purpuric dermatitis and AA that affected the beard.¹⁰ Because HHC is the most common genetic disorder identified in White individuals and has a varied clinical presentation, the documentation of AA may be an important cutaneous clue to help clinicians diagnose HHC early.

Iron Overload in Patients With HHC—The genetic association between HHC and AA, if any, is unknown. What is known is that iron overload can catalyze reactive oxygen species, which can overwhelm cellular antioxidant capacities at particular levels and cause injury to its constituents.¹¹ Data show that the levels of oxidative stress are elevated in the scalp of patients with AA compared to controls and increased 2-fold during the early phase of disease vs late-phase disease.¹² Thus, it is possible that increased iron levels in HHC may contribute to AA in genetically susceptible individuals by direct toxicity that ultimately results in the AA hair disorder that is CD8⁺ T-cell mediated.

Data show that 78% (31/40) of men and 36% (14/39) of women identified with homozygous C282Y mutations determined from family genetic analyses exhibited iron overload.¹³ In general, a normal life expectancy is possible for patients promptly treated with appropriate therapeutic phlebotomies.¹⁴ Thus, early diagnosis and appropriate therapy can prevent consequences of iron overload, which include cirrhosis, diabetes mellitus, and cardiomyopathy.¹³Iron Screening in the Alopecia Workup—Our cases illustrate how iron screening tests as part of the alopecia workup identified a cohort of White patients with iron overload and subsequently led to an early diagnosis of HHC. The calculated 2% lifetime risk for developing AA highlights the importance of evaluating iron status as part of the AA workup, particularly for White men, and the potential health benefit from early diagnosis of HHC. Limitations of this case series included its retrospective nature and small patient number.

The role of micronutrients in the hair follicle cycle is not fully understood; thus deficiency and/or excess of certain micronutrients may be a modifiable risk factor associated with the development and/or treatment of some types of hair loss and therefore may be included in the workup during an alopecia consultation.

Hereditary hemochromatosis (HHC) is the most common genetic disorder identified in White individuals, with a worldwide prevalence of 1 in 220 to 1 in 250 individuals for a homozygous mutation. It most commonly affects individuals of Northern European descent.¹ Men usually present in the fourth to sixth decades of life, while women usually develop symptoms after menopause, as pregnancy and menstruation delay the onset of the disease.² Early symptoms of HHC include fatigue, joint pain, abdominal pain, and weight loss. Men are more likely to develop complications; in fact, 1 in 10 men with HHC will develop severe liver disease.³ As the disease progresses, affected individuals can present with cardiomyopathy (restrictive and dilated), cirrhosis, hypogonadism (usually hypogonadotrophic), arthropathy, diabetes mellitus, hepatomegaly, hepatic cirrhosis, and primary liver cancer (eg, hepatocellular carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma).² Approximately 90% of patients with HHC present with hyperpigmentation at the time of diagnosis.⁴ Thinning or loss of hair is another finding in HHC, primarily reported in the axillae and pubic regions, and is ascribed to hepatotesticular insufficiency.⁵

Alopecia areata (AA) is the most common cause of autoimmune, inflammation-induced hair loss, with a calculated lifetime risk of 2%.⁶ This disease manifests as loss of hair in well-circumscribed patches of skin, most commonly on the scalp; AA also may affect other hair-bearing sites on the body. It is associated with an increased risk for other autoimmune disorders, such as psoriasis, thyroid disease, rheumatoid arthritis, systemic lupus erythematosus, and vitiligo.⁷

Alopecia areata is induced by an inflammatory infiltrate of CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ T lymphocytes around hair follicles in the anagen stage, the active growth phase.⁸ Although the diagnosis is clinical, some clinicians order laboratory thyroid studies to investigate conditions that may be associated with AA. Common treatments include topical, intralesional, and/or systemic corticosteroids; contact immunotherapy; topical and more recently oral minoxidil; phototherapy; and topical and systemic JAK inhibitors, including tofacitinib.^4,9

We reviewed the medical records of 533 patients who were seen in The University of Texas Southwestern (Dallas, Texas) dermatology clinic from January 2015 through January 2020 and were diagnosed with AA. We examined their demographic data and medical history. We sought to determine any relationship between various types of alopecia and certain micronutrient levels through laboratory test results. Ferritin and iron saturation studies were evaluated. We report 4 cases of HHC concurrent with AA, of which 2 HHC diagnoses were uncovered through iron studies as part of the alopecia evaluation.

Case Reports

Patient 1—A 55-year-old White woman presented to the clinic for an alopecia consultation. She had a medical history of hypothyroidism and AA that was treated unsuccessfully with triamcinolone acetonide steroid injections; topical minoxidil; topical steroids; and systemic steroids, specifically oral prednisone. Following evaluation, she successfully transitioned to treatment with oral tofacitinib and continued to do well on tofacitinib.

The patient’s alopecia workup revealed a ferritin level of 245 ng/mL (reference range, 13–150 ng/mL) and iron saturation of 60% (reference range, 20%–50%). She was referred to the hematology department for further evaluation and was diagnosed with HHC. Genetic testing revealed a heterozygous H63D mutation; therapeutic phlebotomy was recommended. Her sister also was recently diagnosed with HHC.

Patient 2—A 55-year-old White man was referred for evaluation and treatment of alopecia universalis. He had a medical history of skin cancer and vitiligo. He attempted contact immunotherapy with diphenylcyclopropenone scalp treatment but stopped due to intolerable inflammation. Intervention with a topical steroid and topical minoxidil was unsuccessful, but use of triamcinolone acetonide steroid injection on the scalp and topical bimatoprost 0.03% on the eyebrows produced satisfactory results.

The patient’s alopecia workup revealed a ferritin level of 422 ng/mL (reference range, 30–400 ng/mL), which prompted a hematology consultation for further evaluation. Notably, the patient ate red meat several times a week, used iron skillets, and denied receiving blood transfusions. His social habits included 3 alcoholic beverages a night, 5 days a week. Ultrasonography of the liver was recommended to assess potential damage from iron overload and alcohol consumption; the results suggested chronic liver disease, not definitive for cirrhosis, and no evidence of hepatocellular carcinoma. Genetic analysis later revealed the heterozygous H63D variant; therapeutic phlebotomy was recommended.

Patient 3—A 22-year-old White man presented with AA involving his facial beard. He had a medical history of vitiligo and psoriasis and a family history of AA as well as other autoimmune diseases including Hashimoto thyroiditis, psoriasis, eczema, and autoimmune hepatitis. Diphenylcyclopropenone treatment was not successful.

Laboratory studies revealed mildly elevated transaminase and ferritin levels. The patient also presented to the gastroenterologist for evaluation of abdominal pain. Subsequent hematology evaluation confirmed the presence of compound heterozygous C282Y and H63D mutations in the HFE gene, and the patient’s mother was later determined to be homozygous for the C282Y mutation with no elevated ferritin level. The patient’s ferritin level at diagnosis was approximately 500 ng/mL (reference range, 22–322 ng/mL); he required a modest number of therapeutic phlebotomies to normalize his ferritin level.

Patient 4—A 62-year-old White woman presented for evaluation and treatment of patchy hair loss on the scalp of 7 months’ duration. She was subsequently diagnosed with AA. After unsuccessful treatment with a triamcinolone acetonide steroid injection, topical immunotherapy with diphenylcyclopropenone was recommended. The patient achieved full hair regrowth after 35 treatments administered at 3-week intervals.

The patient had a medical history of HHC, including homozygosity for the C282Y mutation, and a family history of HHC in 1 sister. Treatment was therapeutic phlebotomy.

Comment

HHC in the Setting of AA—We presented 4 White patients with both HHC and AA. A PubMed search of articles indexed for MEDLINE using the terms HHC and AA yielded only 1 other reported case of newly identified HHC in a 56-year-old man who presented with pigmented purpuric dermatitis and AA that affected the beard.¹⁰ Because HHC is the most common genetic disorder identified in White individuals and has a varied clinical presentation, the documentation of AA may be an important cutaneous clue to help clinicians diagnose HHC early.

Iron Overload in Patients With HHC—The genetic association between HHC and AA, if any, is unknown. What is known is that iron overload can catalyze reactive oxygen species, which can overwhelm cellular antioxidant capacities at particular levels and cause injury to its constituents.¹¹ Data show that the levels of oxidative stress are elevated in the scalp of patients with AA compared to controls and increased 2-fold during the early phase of disease vs late-phase disease.¹² Thus, it is possible that increased iron levels in HHC may contribute to AA in genetically susceptible individuals by direct toxicity that ultimately results in the AA hair disorder that is CD8⁺ T-cell mediated.

Data show that 78% (31/40) of men and 36% (14/39) of women identified with homozygous C282Y mutations determined from family genetic analyses exhibited iron overload.¹³ In general, a normal life expectancy is possible for patients promptly treated with appropriate therapeutic phlebotomies.¹⁴ Thus, early diagnosis and appropriate therapy can prevent consequences of iron overload, which include cirrhosis, diabetes mellitus, and cardiomyopathy.¹³Iron Screening in the Alopecia Workup—Our cases illustrate how iron screening tests as part of the alopecia workup identified a cohort of White patients with iron overload and subsequently led to an early diagnosis of HHC. The calculated 2% lifetime risk for developing AA highlights the importance of evaluating iron status as part of the AA workup, particularly for White men, and the potential health benefit from early diagnosis of HHC. Limitations of this case series included its retrospective nature and small patient number.

SAN DIEGO—As patients with cancer live longer, pain is going to become an even bigger challenge for clinicians, a palliative care specialist told cancer specialists in a presentation at the annual meeting of the Association of VA Hematology/Oncology (AVAHO) in September, and decisions about treatment are becoming more complicated amid the opioid epidemic.

Fortunately, guidelines and clinical experience offer helpful insight into the best practices, said hematologist/oncologist Andrea Ruskin, MD, medical director of palliative care at Veterans Administration (VA) Connecticut Healthcare System (VACHS).

As Ruskin pointed out, two-thirds of newly diagnosed cancer patients are living for at least 5 years, “but with this progress comes challenges.” More than one-third (37%) of cancer survivors report cancer pain, 21% have noncancer pain, and 45% have both. About 5% to 8% of VA cancer survivors use opioids for the long term, she said, although there have been few studies in this population.

Among patients with head and neck cancer, specifically, chronic pain affects 45%, and severe pain affects 11%. Subclinical PTSD, depression, anxiety, and low quality of life are common in this population. “We may cure them, but they have a lot of issues going forward.”

One key strategy is to perform a comprehensive pain assessment at the first visit, and then address pain at every subsequent visit. She recommended a physician resource from the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and a template may be useful to provide helpful questions, Ruskin said.

At VACHS certain questions are routine. “Is pain interfering with your function? Sometimes people say it’s always a 10, but it’s not affecting function at all. Ask if the medicine is working. And how are they taking it? Sometimes they say, ‘I’m taking that for sleep,’ and we say ‘No, Mr. Smith, that is not a sleep medication.’”

Be aware that some patients may use nonmedical opioids, she said. And set expectations early on. “Safe opioid use starts with the very first prescription,” she said. “If I have somebody with myeloma or head and neck cancer, I make it very clear that my goal is that we want you off the opioids after the radiation or once the disease is in remission. I really make an effort at the very beginning to make sure that we're all on the same page.”

As you continue to see a patient, consider ordering urine tests, she said, not as a punitive measure but to make sure you’re offering the safest and most effective treatment. “We don’t do it to say ‘no, no, no.’ We do it for safety and to make sure they’re not getting meds elsewhere.”

What are the best practices when pain doesn’t go away? Should they stay on opioids? According to Ruskin, few evidence-based guidelines address the “more nuanced care” that patients need when their pain lasts for months or years.

But there are useful resources. Ruskin highlighted the National Comprehensive Cancer Network’s survivorship guidelines, and she summarized a few of the available painkiller options. “Opioids are great, and adjuvants are so-so. They work in some people, but we definitely have room for improvement.”

What if patients have persistent opioid use after cancer recovery? “I try to taper if I can, and I try to explain why I’m tapering. It could take months or years to taper patients,” she said. And consider transitioning the patient to buprenorphine, a drug that treats both pain and opioid use disorder, if appropriate. “You don’t need a waiver if you use it for pain. It’s definitely something we’re using more of.”

One important step is to bring in colleagues to help. Psychologists, chiropractors, physical therapists, physiatrists, and pain pharmacists can all be helpful, she said. “Learn about your VA resources and who can partner with you to help these complicated patients. They’re all at your fingertips.”

SAN DIEGO—As patients with cancer live longer, pain is going to become an even bigger challenge for clinicians, a palliative care specialist told cancer specialists in a presentation at the annual meeting of the Association of VA Hematology/Oncology (AVAHO) in September, and decisions about treatment are becoming more complicated amid the opioid epidemic.

Fortunately, guidelines and clinical experience offer helpful insight into the best practices, said hematologist/oncologist Andrea Ruskin, MD, medical director of palliative care at Veterans Administration (VA) Connecticut Healthcare System (VACHS).

As Ruskin pointed out, two-thirds of newly diagnosed cancer patients are living for at least 5 years, “but with this progress comes challenges.” More than one-third (37%) of cancer survivors report cancer pain, 21% have noncancer pain, and 45% have both. About 5% to 8% of VA cancer survivors use opioids for the long term, she said, although there have been few studies in this population.

Among patients with head and neck cancer, specifically, chronic pain affects 45%, and severe pain affects 11%. Subclinical PTSD, depression, anxiety, and low quality of life are common in this population. “We may cure them, but they have a lot of issues going forward.”

One key strategy is to perform a comprehensive pain assessment at the first visit, and then address pain at every subsequent visit. She recommended a physician resource from the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and a template may be useful to provide helpful questions, Ruskin said.

At VACHS certain questions are routine. “Is pain interfering with your function? Sometimes people say it’s always a 10, but it’s not affecting function at all. Ask if the medicine is working. And how are they taking it? Sometimes they say, ‘I’m taking that for sleep,’ and we say ‘No, Mr. Smith, that is not a sleep medication.’”

Be aware that some patients may use nonmedical opioids, she said. And set expectations early on. “Safe opioid use starts with the very first prescription,” she said. “If I have somebody with myeloma or head and neck cancer, I make it very clear that my goal is that we want you off the opioids after the radiation or once the disease is in remission. I really make an effort at the very beginning to make sure that we're all on the same page.”

As you continue to see a patient, consider ordering urine tests, she said, not as a punitive measure but to make sure you’re offering the safest and most effective treatment. “We don’t do it to say ‘no, no, no.’ We do it for safety and to make sure they’re not getting meds elsewhere.”

What are the best practices when pain doesn’t go away? Should they stay on opioids? According to Ruskin, few evidence-based guidelines address the “more nuanced care” that patients need when their pain lasts for months or years.

But there are useful resources. Ruskin highlighted the National Comprehensive Cancer Network’s survivorship guidelines, and she summarized a few of the available painkiller options. “Opioids are great, and adjuvants are so-so. They work in some people, but we definitely have room for improvement.”

What if patients have persistent opioid use after cancer recovery? “I try to taper if I can, and I try to explain why I’m tapering. It could take months or years to taper patients,” she said. And consider transitioning the patient to buprenorphine, a drug that treats both pain and opioid use disorder, if appropriate. “You don’t need a waiver if you use it for pain. It’s definitely something we’re using more of.”

One important step is to bring in colleagues to help. Psychologists, chiropractors, physical therapists, physiatrists, and pain pharmacists can all be helpful, she said. “Learn about your VA resources and who can partner with you to help these complicated patients. They’re all at your fingertips.”

SAN DIEGO—As patients with cancer live longer, pain is going to become an even bigger challenge for clinicians, a palliative care specialist told cancer specialists in a presentation at the annual meeting of the Association of VA Hematology/Oncology (AVAHO) in September, and decisions about treatment are becoming more complicated amid the opioid epidemic.

Fortunately, guidelines and clinical experience offer helpful insight into the best practices, said hematologist/oncologist Andrea Ruskin, MD, medical director of palliative care at Veterans Administration (VA) Connecticut Healthcare System (VACHS).

As Ruskin pointed out, two-thirds of newly diagnosed cancer patients are living for at least 5 years, “but with this progress comes challenges.” More than one-third (37%) of cancer survivors report cancer pain, 21% have noncancer pain, and 45% have both. About 5% to 8% of VA cancer survivors use opioids for the long term, she said, although there have been few studies in this population.

Among patients with head and neck cancer, specifically, chronic pain affects 45%, and severe pain affects 11%. Subclinical PTSD, depression, anxiety, and low quality of life are common in this population. “We may cure them, but they have a lot of issues going forward.”

One key strategy is to perform a comprehensive pain assessment at the first visit, and then address pain at every subsequent visit. She recommended a physician resource from the American Society of Clinical Oncology, and a template may be useful to provide helpful questions, Ruskin said.

At VACHS certain questions are routine. “Is pain interfering with your function? Sometimes people say it’s always a 10, but it’s not affecting function at all. Ask if the medicine is working. And how are they taking it? Sometimes they say, ‘I’m taking that for sleep,’ and we say ‘No, Mr. Smith, that is not a sleep medication.’”

Be aware that some patients may use nonmedical opioids, she said. And set expectations early on. “Safe opioid use starts with the very first prescription,” she said. “If I have somebody with myeloma or head and neck cancer, I make it very clear that my goal is that we want you off the opioids after the radiation or once the disease is in remission. I really make an effort at the very beginning to make sure that we're all on the same page.”

As you continue to see a patient, consider ordering urine tests, she said, not as a punitive measure but to make sure you’re offering the safest and most effective treatment. “We don’t do it to say ‘no, no, no.’ We do it for safety and to make sure they’re not getting meds elsewhere.”

What are the best practices when pain doesn’t go away? Should they stay on opioids? According to Ruskin, few evidence-based guidelines address the “more nuanced care” that patients need when their pain lasts for months or years.

But there are useful resources. Ruskin highlighted the National Comprehensive Cancer Network’s survivorship guidelines, and she summarized a few of the available painkiller options. “Opioids are great, and adjuvants are so-so. They work in some people, but we definitely have room for improvement.”

What if patients have persistent opioid use after cancer recovery? “I try to taper if I can, and I try to explain why I’m tapering. It could take months or years to taper patients,” she said. And consider transitioning the patient to buprenorphine, a drug that treats both pain and opioid use disorder, if appropriate. “You don’t need a waiver if you use it for pain. It’s definitely something we’re using more of.”

One important step is to bring in colleagues to help. Psychologists, chiropractors, physical therapists, physiatrists, and pain pharmacists can all be helpful, she said. “Learn about your VA resources and who can partner with you to help these complicated patients. They’re all at your fingertips.”

Some 80,000 active-duty women are stationed in states with abortion restrictions or bans. That’s 40% of active-duty service women in the continental United States, according to research sponsored by the US Department of Defense (DoD) and released in September. Nearly all (95%) are of reproductive age. Annually, an estimated 2573 to 4126 women have an abortion, but just a handful of those are done at military treatment facilities. Moreover, roughly 275,000 DoD civilians also live in states with a full ban or extreme restrictions on access to abortion. Of those, more than 81,000 are women. Nearly 43% have no access to abortion or drastically abridged access.  

The recent Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization has created uncertainty for those women and their families, and potential legal and financial risk for the health care practitioners who would provide reproductive care, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said in an October 20, 2022 memo.

Therefore, he has directed the DoD to take “all appropriate action… as soon as possible to ensure that our service members and their families can access reproductive health care and our health care providers can operate effectively.”

Among the actions he has approved: Paying for travel to reproductive health care—essentially, making it more feasible for members to cross state lines. Service members, he noted in the memo, are often required to travel or move to meet staffing, operational, and training requirements. The “practical effects,” he said, are that significant numbers of service members and their families “may be forced to travel greater distances, take more time off from work, and pay more out-of-pocket expenses to receive reproductive health care.” 

Those effects, Austin said, “qualify as unusual, extraordinary, hardship, or emergency circumstances for service members and their dependents and will interfere with our ability to recruit, retain, and maintain the readiness of a highly qualified force.”

Women, who comprise 17% of the active-duty force, are the fastest-growing subpopulation in the military. For the past several years, according to the DoD research report, the military services have been “deliberately recruiting women”—who perform essential duties in every sector: health care and electrical and mechanical equipment repair, for example.

“The full effects of Dobbs on military readiness are yet to be known,” the report says, but it notes several potential problems: Women may not join the service knowing that they could end up in a state with restrictions. If already serving, they may leave. In some states, women face criminal prosecution.

The long arm of Dobbs reaches far into the future, too. For instance, if unintended pregnancies are carried to term, the DoD will need to provide care to women during pregnancy, delivery, and the postpartum period—and the family will need to care for the child. Looking only at women in states with restricted access or bans, the DoD estimates the number of unintended pregnancies annually would be 2800 among civilian employees and between 4400 and 4700 among active-duty service women.

Men are also directly affected: More than 40% of male service members are married to a civilian woman who is a TRICARE dependent, 20% of active-duty service women are married to a fellow service member, and active-duty service men might be responsible for pregnancies among women who are not DoD dependents but who might be unable to get an abortion, the DoD report notes.

Austin has directed the DoD to create a uniform policy that allows for appropriate administrative absence, to establish travel and transportation allowances, and to amend any applicable travel regulations to facilitate official travel to access noncovered reproductive health care that is unavailable within the local area of the service member’s permanent duty station.

So that health care practitioners do not have to face criminal or civil liability or risk losing their licenses, Austin directed the DoD to develop a program to reimburse applicable fees, as appropriate and consistent with applicable federal law, for DoD health care practitioners who wish to become licensed in a state other than that in which they are currently licensed. He also directed the DoD to develop a program to support DoD practitioners who are subject to adverse action, including indemnification of any verdict, judgment, or other monetary award consistent with applicable law.

“Our greatest strength is our people,” Austin wrote. “There is no higher priority than taking care of our people, and ensuring their health and well-being.” He directed that the actions outlined in the memorandum “be executed as soon as possible.”

Some 80,000 active-duty women are stationed in states with abortion restrictions or bans. That’s 40% of active-duty service women in the continental United States, according to research sponsored by the US Department of Defense (DoD) and released in September. Nearly all (95%) are of reproductive age. Annually, an estimated 2573 to 4126 women have an abortion, but just a handful of those are done at military treatment facilities. Moreover, roughly 275,000 DoD civilians also live in states with a full ban or extreme restrictions on access to abortion. Of those, more than 81,000 are women. Nearly 43% have no access to abortion or drastically abridged access.  

The recent Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization has created uncertainty for those women and their families, and potential legal and financial risk for the health care practitioners who would provide reproductive care, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said in an October 20, 2022 memo.

Therefore, he has directed the DoD to take “all appropriate action… as soon as possible to ensure that our service members and their families can access reproductive health care and our health care providers can operate effectively.”

Among the actions he has approved: Paying for travel to reproductive health care—essentially, making it more feasible for members to cross state lines. Service members, he noted in the memo, are often required to travel or move to meet staffing, operational, and training requirements. The “practical effects,” he said, are that significant numbers of service members and their families “may be forced to travel greater distances, take more time off from work, and pay more out-of-pocket expenses to receive reproductive health care.” 

Those effects, Austin said, “qualify as unusual, extraordinary, hardship, or emergency circumstances for service members and their dependents and will interfere with our ability to recruit, retain, and maintain the readiness of a highly qualified force.”

Women, who comprise 17% of the active-duty force, are the fastest-growing subpopulation in the military. For the past several years, according to the DoD research report, the military services have been “deliberately recruiting women”—who perform essential duties in every sector: health care and electrical and mechanical equipment repair, for example.

“The full effects of Dobbs on military readiness are yet to be known,” the report says, but it notes several potential problems: Women may not join the service knowing that they could end up in a state with restrictions. If already serving, they may leave. In some states, women face criminal prosecution.

The long arm of Dobbs reaches far into the future, too. For instance, if unintended pregnancies are carried to term, the DoD will need to provide care to women during pregnancy, delivery, and the postpartum period—and the family will need to care for the child. Looking only at women in states with restricted access or bans, the DoD estimates the number of unintended pregnancies annually would be 2800 among civilian employees and between 4400 and 4700 among active-duty service women.

Men are also directly affected: More than 40% of male service members are married to a civilian woman who is a TRICARE dependent, 20% of active-duty service women are married to a fellow service member, and active-duty service men might be responsible for pregnancies among women who are not DoD dependents but who might be unable to get an abortion, the DoD report notes.

Austin has directed the DoD to create a uniform policy that allows for appropriate administrative absence, to establish travel and transportation allowances, and to amend any applicable travel regulations to facilitate official travel to access noncovered reproductive health care that is unavailable within the local area of the service member’s permanent duty station.

So that health care practitioners do not have to face criminal or civil liability or risk losing their licenses, Austin directed the DoD to develop a program to reimburse applicable fees, as appropriate and consistent with applicable federal law, for DoD health care practitioners who wish to become licensed in a state other than that in which they are currently licensed. He also directed the DoD to develop a program to support DoD practitioners who are subject to adverse action, including indemnification of any verdict, judgment, or other monetary award consistent with applicable law.

“Our greatest strength is our people,” Austin wrote. “There is no higher priority than taking care of our people, and ensuring their health and well-being.” He directed that the actions outlined in the memorandum “be executed as soon as possible.”

Some 80,000 active-duty women are stationed in states with abortion restrictions or bans. That’s 40% of active-duty service women in the continental United States, according to research sponsored by the US Department of Defense (DoD) and released in September. Nearly all (95%) are of reproductive age. Annually, an estimated 2573 to 4126 women have an abortion, but just a handful of those are done at military treatment facilities. Moreover, roughly 275,000 DoD civilians also live in states with a full ban or extreme restrictions on access to abortion. Of those, more than 81,000 are women. Nearly 43% have no access to abortion or drastically abridged access.  

The recent Supreme Court ruling in Dobbs v Jackson Women’s Health Organization has created uncertainty for those women and their families, and potential legal and financial risk for the health care practitioners who would provide reproductive care, Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said in an October 20, 2022 memo.

Therefore, he has directed the DoD to take “all appropriate action… as soon as possible to ensure that our service members and their families can access reproductive health care and our health care providers can operate effectively.”

Among the actions he has approved: Paying for travel to reproductive health care—essentially, making it more feasible for members to cross state lines. Service members, he noted in the memo, are often required to travel or move to meet staffing, operational, and training requirements. The “practical effects,” he said, are that significant numbers of service members and their families “may be forced to travel greater distances, take more time off from work, and pay more out-of-pocket expenses to receive reproductive health care.” 

Those effects, Austin said, “qualify as unusual, extraordinary, hardship, or emergency circumstances for service members and their dependents and will interfere with our ability to recruit, retain, and maintain the readiness of a highly qualified force.”

Women, who comprise 17% of the active-duty force, are the fastest-growing subpopulation in the military. For the past several years, according to the DoD research report, the military services have been “deliberately recruiting women”—who perform essential duties in every sector: health care and electrical and mechanical equipment repair, for example.

“The full effects of Dobbs on military readiness are yet to be known,” the report says, but it notes several potential problems: Women may not join the service knowing that they could end up in a state with restrictions. If already serving, they may leave. In some states, women face criminal prosecution.

The long arm of Dobbs reaches far into the future, too. For instance, if unintended pregnancies are carried to term, the DoD will need to provide care to women during pregnancy, delivery, and the postpartum period—and the family will need to care for the child. Looking only at women in states with restricted access or bans, the DoD estimates the number of unintended pregnancies annually would be 2800 among civilian employees and between 4400 and 4700 among active-duty service women.

Men are also directly affected: More than 40% of male service members are married to a civilian woman who is a TRICARE dependent, 20% of active-duty service women are married to a fellow service member, and active-duty service men might be responsible for pregnancies among women who are not DoD dependents but who might be unable to get an abortion, the DoD report notes.

Austin has directed the DoD to create a uniform policy that allows for appropriate administrative absence, to establish travel and transportation allowances, and to amend any applicable travel regulations to facilitate official travel to access noncovered reproductive health care that is unavailable within the local area of the service member’s permanent duty station.

So that health care practitioners do not have to face criminal or civil liability or risk losing their licenses, Austin directed the DoD to develop a program to reimburse applicable fees, as appropriate and consistent with applicable federal law, for DoD health care practitioners who wish to become licensed in a state other than that in which they are currently licensed. He also directed the DoD to develop a program to support DoD practitioners who are subject to adverse action, including indemnification of any verdict, judgment, or other monetary award consistent with applicable law.

“Our greatest strength is our people,” Austin wrote. “There is no higher priority than taking care of our people, and ensuring their health and well-being.” He directed that the actions outlined in the memorandum “be executed as soon as possible.”

In an intensive push to fill acute workforce shortages, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is holding a “national onboarding surge event” the week of November 14. The goal is to get people who have already said yes to a job in the VA on that job more quickly. Every VA facility has been asked to submit a list of the highest-priority candidates, regardless of the position.

One of the most pressing reasons for getting more workers into the pipeline faster is that more and more veterans are entering VA care. As of October 1, tens of thousands of veterans will be eligible for VA health care, thanks to the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022 (PACT Act), passed in August, which expanded benefits for post-9/11 service members with illnesses due to toxic exposures.

Another reason is the need to fill the gaps left by attrition. In an October 19 press briefing, VA Undersecretary for Health Shereef Elnahal said the agency needs to hire about 52,000 employees per year just to keep up with the rate of health care professionals (HCPs) leaving the agency. At a September breakfast meeting with the Defense Writers Group, VA Secretary Denis McDonough said July 2022 marked the first month this year that the VA hired more nurses than it lost to retirement. He said the VA needs to hire 45,000 nurses over the next 3 years to keep up with attrition and growing demand for veteran care.

“We have to do a better job on hiring,” McDonough said. Streamlining the process is a major goal. Hiring rules loosened during the pandemic have since tightened back up. He pointed out that in many cases, the VA takes 90 to 100 days to onboard candidates and called the long-drawn-out process “being dragged through a bureaucratic morass.” During that time, he said, “They’re not being paid, they’re filling out paperwork… That’s disastrous.” In his press briefing, Elnahal said “we lose folks after we’ve made the selection” because the process is so long.

Moreover, the agency has a critical shortage not only of HCPs but the human resources professionals needed to fast-track the hirees’ progress. McDonough called it a “supply chain issue.” “We have the lowest ratio of human resource professionals per employee in the federal government by a long shot.” Partly, he said, because “a lot of our people end up hired away to other federal agencies.”

McDonough said the VA is also interested in transitioning more active-duty service members with in-demand skills, certifications, and talent into the VA workforce. “Cross-walking active duty into VA service much more aggressively,” he said, is another way to “grow that supply of ready, deployable, trained personnel.” The PACT Act gives the VA new incentives to entice workers, such as expanded recruitment, retention bonuses, and student loan repayment. The VA already provides training to about 1500 nurse and nurse residency programs across the VA, McDonough said but has plans for expanding to 5 times its current scope. He also addressed the question of a looming physician shortage: “Roughly 7 in 10 doctors in the United States will have had some portion of their training in a VA facility. We have to maintain that training function going forward.” The VA trains doctors, he added, “better than anybody else.”

The onboarding event will serve as a “national signal that we take this priority very seriously,” Elnahal said. “This will be not only a chance to have a step function improvement in the number of folks on board, which is an urgent priority, but to also set the groundwork for the more longitudinal work that we will need to do to improve the hiring process.”

Bulking up the workforce, he said, is “still far and away among our first priorities. Because if we don’t get our hospitals and facility staffed, it’s going to be a really hard effort to make process on the other priorities.”

In an intensive push to fill acute workforce shortages, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is holding a “national onboarding surge event” the week of November 14. The goal is to get people who have already said yes to a job in the VA on that job more quickly. Every VA facility has been asked to submit a list of the highest-priority candidates, regardless of the position.

One of the most pressing reasons for getting more workers into the pipeline faster is that more and more veterans are entering VA care. As of October 1, tens of thousands of veterans will be eligible for VA health care, thanks to the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022 (PACT Act), passed in August, which expanded benefits for post-9/11 service members with illnesses due to toxic exposures.

Another reason is the need to fill the gaps left by attrition. In an October 19 press briefing, VA Undersecretary for Health Shereef Elnahal said the agency needs to hire about 52,000 employees per year just to keep up with the rate of health care professionals (HCPs) leaving the agency. At a September breakfast meeting with the Defense Writers Group, VA Secretary Denis McDonough said July 2022 marked the first month this year that the VA hired more nurses than it lost to retirement. He said the VA needs to hire 45,000 nurses over the next 3 years to keep up with attrition and growing demand for veteran care.

“We have to do a better job on hiring,” McDonough said. Streamlining the process is a major goal. Hiring rules loosened during the pandemic have since tightened back up. He pointed out that in many cases, the VA takes 90 to 100 days to onboard candidates and called the long-drawn-out process “being dragged through a bureaucratic morass.” During that time, he said, “They’re not being paid, they’re filling out paperwork… That’s disastrous.” In his press briefing, Elnahal said “we lose folks after we’ve made the selection” because the process is so long.

Moreover, the agency has a critical shortage not only of HCPs but the human resources professionals needed to fast-track the hirees’ progress. McDonough called it a “supply chain issue.” “We have the lowest ratio of human resource professionals per employee in the federal government by a long shot.” Partly, he said, because “a lot of our people end up hired away to other federal agencies.”

McDonough said the VA is also interested in transitioning more active-duty service members with in-demand skills, certifications, and talent into the VA workforce. “Cross-walking active duty into VA service much more aggressively,” he said, is another way to “grow that supply of ready, deployable, trained personnel.” The PACT Act gives the VA new incentives to entice workers, such as expanded recruitment, retention bonuses, and student loan repayment. The VA already provides training to about 1500 nurse and nurse residency programs across the VA, McDonough said but has plans for expanding to 5 times its current scope. He also addressed the question of a looming physician shortage: “Roughly 7 in 10 doctors in the United States will have had some portion of their training in a VA facility. We have to maintain that training function going forward.” The VA trains doctors, he added, “better than anybody else.”

The onboarding event will serve as a “national signal that we take this priority very seriously,” Elnahal said. “This will be not only a chance to have a step function improvement in the number of folks on board, which is an urgent priority, but to also set the groundwork for the more longitudinal work that we will need to do to improve the hiring process.”

Bulking up the workforce, he said, is “still far and away among our first priorities. Because if we don’t get our hospitals and facility staffed, it’s going to be a really hard effort to make process on the other priorities.”

In an intensive push to fill acute workforce shortages, the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) is holding a “national onboarding surge event” the week of November 14. The goal is to get people who have already said yes to a job in the VA on that job more quickly. Every VA facility has been asked to submit a list of the highest-priority candidates, regardless of the position.

One of the most pressing reasons for getting more workers into the pipeline faster is that more and more veterans are entering VA care. As of October 1, tens of thousands of veterans will be eligible for VA health care, thanks to the Sergeant First Class Heath Robinson Honoring our Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics Act of 2022 (PACT Act), passed in August, which expanded benefits for post-9/11 service members with illnesses due to toxic exposures.

Another reason is the need to fill the gaps left by attrition. In an October 19 press briefing, VA Undersecretary for Health Shereef Elnahal said the agency needs to hire about 52,000 employees per year just to keep up with the rate of health care professionals (HCPs) leaving the agency. At a September breakfast meeting with the Defense Writers Group, VA Secretary Denis McDonough said July 2022 marked the first month this year that the VA hired more nurses than it lost to retirement. He said the VA needs to hire 45,000 nurses over the next 3 years to keep up with attrition and growing demand for veteran care.

“We have to do a better job on hiring,” McDonough said. Streamlining the process is a major goal. Hiring rules loosened during the pandemic have since tightened back up. He pointed out that in many cases, the VA takes 90 to 100 days to onboard candidates and called the long-drawn-out process “being dragged through a bureaucratic morass.” During that time, he said, “They’re not being paid, they’re filling out paperwork… That’s disastrous.” In his press briefing, Elnahal said “we lose folks after we’ve made the selection” because the process is so long.

Moreover, the agency has a critical shortage not only of HCPs but the human resources professionals needed to fast-track the hirees’ progress. McDonough called it a “supply chain issue.” “We have the lowest ratio of human resource professionals per employee in the federal government by a long shot.” Partly, he said, because “a lot of our people end up hired away to other federal agencies.”

McDonough said the VA is also interested in transitioning more active-duty service members with in-demand skills, certifications, and talent into the VA workforce. “Cross-walking active duty into VA service much more aggressively,” he said, is another way to “grow that supply of ready, deployable, trained personnel.” The PACT Act gives the VA new incentives to entice workers, such as expanded recruitment, retention bonuses, and student loan repayment. The VA already provides training to about 1500 nurse and nurse residency programs across the VA, McDonough said but has plans for expanding to 5 times its current scope. He also addressed the question of a looming physician shortage: “Roughly 7 in 10 doctors in the United States will have had some portion of their training in a VA facility. We have to maintain that training function going forward.” The VA trains doctors, he added, “better than anybody else.”

The onboarding event will serve as a “national signal that we take this priority very seriously,” Elnahal said. “This will be not only a chance to have a step function improvement in the number of folks on board, which is an urgent priority, but to also set the groundwork for the more longitudinal work that we will need to do to improve the hiring process.”

Bulking up the workforce, he said, is “still far and away among our first priorities. Because if we don’t get our hospitals and facility staffed, it’s going to be a really hard effort to make process on the other priorities.”