The infection rate of intralesional triamcinolone and the safety of compounding in dermatology for intradermal and subcutaneous injection: A retrospective medical record review.

BACKGROUND: Intralesional injection of sterile medications remains a mainstay in dermatology, enabling a tailored, low-cost, in-office therapy. After the 2012 United States outbreak of fungal meningitis from contaminated intrathecally administered corticosteroids, there has been increased regulation of in-office compounding, regardless of the administration route. Studies demonstrating the safety data of in-office corticosteroid compounding for intradermal or subcutaneous use are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To assess the incidence of infection caused by compounded in-office intralesional triamcinolone. METHODS: A retrospective medical record review identified patients who received in-office intralesional corticosteroid injections in 2016. Medical documentation within 30 days of injection was reviewed for suspected infection. RESULTS: The records of 4370 intralesional triamcinolone injections were assessed, of which 2780 (64%) were compounded triamcinolone with bacteriostatic saline. We identified 11 (0.25%) suspected localized infections, with 4 of the 11 in the compounding cohort. Of these, 7 of 11 occurred after injection of an "inflamed cyst." No hospitalizations or deaths occurred. No temporal or locational relationships were identified. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited to 2 academic institutions. A 30-day postinjection time frame was used. CONCLUSION: In-office compounding for intralesional dermal and subcutaneous administration is safe when sterile products are used by medical practitioners. There is no increased risk of compounded triamcinolone relative to noncompounded triamcinolone.

Assessing the clinical effectiveness of an algorithmic approach for mucosal lichen planus (MLP): A retrospective review.

BACKGROUND: Mucosal lichen planus (MLP) is a therapeutic challenge in need of a new treatment approach because of its debilitating effect on patient's quality of life. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate a standardized treatment plan for patients with MLP. A second objective was to describe the effect of mycophenolate mofetil in this patient population. METHODS: The study retrospectively analyzed 53 patients with MLP treated using a standardized algorithm. The number of MLP lesions, disease activity, and pain at the last visit were compared with baseline scores determined at the initial visit. Results were analyzed using the paired samples t test and confirmed with the Wilcoxon matched pairs signed rank test. RESULTS: The average number of lesions was reduced from 3.77 to 1.67 (P < .001). The average disease activity was reduced from 2.73 to 0.90 (P < .001). Average pain reported decreased from 2.03 to 1.03 (P < .001). LIMITATIONS: This study was a retrospective analysis of a small patient population. There was no universal symptom severity scale used at the time of treatment for some patients. CONCLUSION: The standardized treatment plan reduced symptoms for patients with MLP. Mycophenolate mofetil appears to be a reasonable treatment option for these patients.