Cellulitis is a common clinical condition that is often inaccurately diagnosed. Risk factors

for the development of cellulitis include obesity, lymphoedema and lower limb ulceration.

It is important to accurately diagnose and effectively treat cellulitis in order to provide

cost effective care and reduce patient suffering. This article will deliver an overview on the

burden of cellulitis, provide information that will aid accurate diagnosis and summarise

current treatment options

Atkin, Leanne

University of Huddersfield Repository

University of Huddersfield RepositoryAtkin, LeanneCellulitis of the lower limbs: incidence, diagnosis and managementOriginal CitationAtkin, Leanne (2016) Cellulitis of the lower limbs: incidence, diagnosis and management. Wounds UK, 12 (2). pp. 52-56. ISSN 1746-6814 This version is available at http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/28172/The University Repository is a digital collection of the research output of theUniversity, available on Open Access. Copyright and Moral Rights for the itemson this site are retained by the individual author and/or other copyright owners.Users may access full items free of charge; copies of full text items generallycan be reproduced, displayed or performed and given to third parties in anyformat or medium for personal research or study, educational or not-for-profitpurposes without prior permission or charge, provided:• The authors, title and full bibliographic details is credited in any copy;• A hyperlink and/or URL is included for the original metadata page; and• The content is not changed in any way.For more information, including our policy and submission procedure, pleasecontact the Repository Team at: E.mailbox@hud.ac.uk.http://eprints.hud.ac.uk/Cellulitis of the lower limbs: Incidence, Diagnosis and Management  Leanne Atkin, Lecturer practitioner/Vascular Nurse Specialist, School of Human and Health Sciences, University of Huddersfield and Mid Yorkshire NHS Trust, E mail: l.atkin@hud.ac.uk   Introduction Cellulitis is an inflammatory skin condition caused by acute infection of the dermal and subcutaneous layers of the skin, it refers to a superficial diffuse, spreading skin infection without underlying collection of pus.  Cellulitis is a common diagnosis in both inpatients, outpatients as well as primary care settings, (Bailey and Kroshinsky, 2011).  It accounts for 3% of attendance to Accident and Emergency departments within the United Kingdom (UK), (Haydock et al., 2007). The prevalence of cellulitis is increasing year on year, the aging population and increasing levels of obesity are thought to contribute to this rise, (Hirschmann and Raugi, 2012a).  Many practitioners will encounter patients with suspected cellulitis, however, it’s diagnosis is not always easy.  The identification of cellulitis is based solely on clinical findings, and unfortunately there are several other common conditions that mimic the clinical signs of cellulitis, creating a potential for misdiagnosis and incorrect management, (Hirschmann and Raugi, 2012b).  Hence it is essential that all practitioners are skilled in recognising cellulitis, confirming diagnosis and possess the ability and skills to set appropriate treatment plans.  Therefore, ensuring all patients receive timely effective care to improve their health outcomes. Cellulitis Cellulitis is an inflammatory skin condition with an infectious origin, classically presenting itself through erythema, swelling, warmth, oedema and tenderness over the affected area.  There is often poorly defined border separating the affected from the non-affected skin, (Ch'ng and Johar, 2016).   It is commonly caused by Streptococcus Pyogenes or Staphylococcus Aureus, which resides in the interdigital spaces, and cellulitis most often affects the lower limbs, (Corwin et al., 2005).  Hirschmann and Raugi (2012b) established that 30% - 80% of patients with cellulitis had an interdigital skin condition such as eczema, fissures or athletes foot.   Any disruptions in the protective barrier of the skin surface will allow bacteria to invade the body and therefore patients will be at increased risk of developing cellulitis. Incidence The incidence and treatment of cellulitis places a significant burden on the National Health Service, both in terms of costs and resources.  Lower limb cellulitis accounted for 69,576 hospital admissions in England during 2004-2005, with a mean hospital in patient length of stay of 10 days, (Department of Health, 2006a) (Halpern et al., 2008).  This accounts for over 400,000 bed days a year, and annually the NHS spends £172-£254 million on the admission and treatment of patients with cellulitis, (Curtis, 2011, Department of Health, 2006b).   Risk Factors Risk factors for developing cellulitis include older age, obesity, venous insufficiency, saphenous venectomy (vein harvest for bypass surgery), trauma, eczema, dermatitis, athletes foot and oedema, (Hirschmann and Raugi, 2012a).   Patients with lymphoedema are especially at risk of developing cellulitis, due to the disturbances in lymph drainage and associated localised impaired host response to infection, (Soo et al., 2008). It is reported that within a one year period 28% of patients with lymphoedema will develop cellulitis, and one quarter of this group will required admission to hospital for treatment with intravenous antibiotics, (Soo et al., 2008).  Typically the onset of cellulitis is between 40 and 60 years, (Ellis Simonsen et al., 2006), cellulitis occurs in equal frequency in men and women.  The overall highest predisposing factor of developing cellulites is a previous episode of cellulitis, reported annual recurrence rates are between 8 – 20%, (Hirschmann and Raugi, 2012b).  Diagnosis Cellulitis is one of the most common mis-diagnosed conditions, with as many as one third of patients are being diagnosed incorrectly, (Hirschmann and Raugi, 2012b).  In the region of 132,000 bed days and £84.5 million pounds per year is wasted as a result of inaccurate diagnosis, (Levell et al., 2011).  Levell et al. (2011) study also showed that a third of patients (33%) referred with lower limb cellulitis had an alternative diagnosis, and of the confirmed cases of cellulitis 28% had another skin condition which if treated simultaneously would speed recovery and reduce the risk of recurrence.  This mis-diagnosis clearly has other impacts in terms of patient expectations, treatment delays and wider public health risks due to the potential inappropriate use of antibiotics.   Other conditions that can mimic the clinical features of cellulitis include: varicose eczema, venous hypertension, and lipodermatosclerosis, vasculitis, necrotizing fasciitis, deep vein thrombosis, septic arthritis, acute gout and thrombophlebitis, (NICE, 2015). Clinical signs of cellulitis include pyrexia, general malaise, pain, and  patients often feel generally unwell reporting chills or sweating, (Gunderson, 2011, Wingfield, 2012).   These systemic symptoms may accompany or precede the acute onset of skin changes.   The affected area will be subject to  redness, warmth, swelling and localised tenderness, there is clear demarcated areas and the skin can be raised, tight and shiny, (Eagle, 2007, Opoku, 2015).  Typically there is unilateral presentation, with bilateral leg cellulitis being very rare,  (NICE, 2015). Laboratory investigations can aid diagnosis, CREST (2005), state that although non-specific nearly all patients with cellulitis will have a raised White Cell Count (WCC) and elevated Erythrocyte Sedimentation Rate (ESR) or C-reactive protein (CRP) and that normal blood inflammatory markers make the diagnosis of cellulitis less likely.  However, normal WCC does not exclude cellulitis.  Lazzarini et al. (2005) found that only 50% of patients admitted with cellulitis had a raised WCC, and that ESR and CRP were much more sensitive markers with increases observed in 85% and 97% of patients respectively.   The use of a diagnostic checklist can help prevent mis-diagnosis, the checklist produced by Opoku (2015) offers an excellent practical tool to aid accurate diagnosis, (Figure 1). Classification Classification of severity can be useful in terms of admission and treatment decisions. The Eron classification (figure 2) is used within CREST Guidelines (2005) and NICE guidelines (2015). Figure 2 Table adapted from CREST (2005). Classification Description Treatment I Patients have no signs of systemic toxicity, have no uncontrolled co-morbidities and can usually be managed  with oral antimicrobials on an outpatient basis Oral antibiotic therapy Identification and management of underlying risk factors. II Patients are either systemically ill or systemically well but with a co-morbidity such a peripheral vascular disease, chronic venous insufficiency or morbid obesity which may complicate or delay resolution of their infection Requires IV antibiotics. Admission may not be necessary if there are facilities and expertise in community Commented [LC1]: Need to see if we can re publish this – was published in wounds uk originally? III Patients may have a significant systemic upset such as acute confusion, tachycardia, tachypnoea, hypotension, or may have unstable co-morbidities that may interfere with a response to therapy or have a limb threatening infection due to vascular compromise Admit to hospital for IV antibiotics and careful monitoring IV Patients have sepsis syndrome or severe life threatening infections such as necrotizing fasciitis Admit to hospital for IV antibiotics and treatment of sepsis.      Treatment Staph aureus is the most common cause of cellulitis, this has been found to be the causative bacteria in between 59% and 76% of cases, (Moran et al., 2006, Lee et al., 2015).  Individualised bacterial identification from microbiology is often difficult due to the low recovery rate from needle aspirates, skin biopsies and blood cultures, (Jeng et al., 2010).  The choice of which antimicrobial agent to use will be governed by the suspected bacteria involved and steered by local antibiotic guidelines.  Commonly flucloxacillin is used as first line treatment (Clarithromycin if allergic to penicillin) as this covers both streptococcal and staphylococcal infections.  In patients with known lymphoedema Amoxicillin by more effective if there is no evidence of folliculitis, pus formation or crusted dermatitis, (British Lymphology Society, 2015, NICE, 2015).  Antibiotic should be used for a period of 7 days.  Before commencing treatment, if possible, mark the area around the extent of infection with an appropriate skin marker, this can be useful to monitor responses from antibiotics, (NICE, 2015).  All patients should be reviewed after 48 hours of commencing treatment, this can be face to face or by telephone, depending on clinical judgement, to assess effectiveness of the management plan. Compression in Cellulitis Patients with venous ulceration are at higher risk of developing cellulitis due to the breakdown of the protective barrier of the skin, and these patients are often in compression therapy to treat the underlying venous hypertension.  It is commonly thought that it is contraindicated to continue compression therapy when patients have an acute infection, and in many patients compression therapy is routinely stopped if there is evidence of acute cellulites.  This is not definitive, and in fact there is an argument for the need of continued compression.  In each episode of cellulitis the lymphatic system is challenged, and cellulitis can result in permanent damage to the lymphatics system leading to the development of chronic oedema or lymphoedema, (Cox, 2006).   This results in an increased risk of recurrence of cellulitis as  oedema, lymphoedema and cellulitis have been proven to be strongly associated, (Soo et al., 2008).   The lymphatic changes results in the patients entering a continuous cycle of increased chances of oedema where the oedema predisposes patients to cellulitis. Additionally, cellulitis is a cause of persistent oedema and any episode of cellulitis predisposes to further episodes, (Cox, 2006).  This all results in patients being at increased risk of recurrence and long term conditions.  Compression therapy can help support the lymphatic channels during this acute episode so therefore does not need to be routinely stopped, however, many patients simply will not be able to cope with the compression due to the increased pain from the affected area.  But the decision to stop compression should be one based on individual patient assessment as opposed standard practice.     Conclusion Lower limb cellulitis is a common condition which has both significant morbidity and resource implications.  There are many other conditions that mimic the clinical signs of cellulitis, but these can easily be distinguished with careful history taking and holistic patient assessment.  Accurate diagnosis is vital to ensure effective patient management whilst protecting the limited resources of antibiotics.  Additionally practitioners need to treat underlying or predisposing conditions in parallel, wherever possible, to optimise treatment, thus reducing the risk of recurrence and improving overall quality of care.   Figure 1  Taken from Opoku (2015)  References BAILEY, E. & KROSHINSKY, D. 2011. Cellulitis: diagnosis and management. Dermatologic Therapy, 24, 229-239. BRITISH LYMPHOLOGY SOCIETY 2015. Consenus Document on the Management of Cellulitis in Lymphoedema. CH'NG, C. C. & JOHAR, A. 2016. Clinical characteristics of patients with lower limb cellulitis and antibiotic usage in Hospital Kuala Lumpur: a 7-year retrospective study. International Journal of Dermatology, 55, 30-35. CORWIN, P., TOOP, L. & MCGEOCH, G. 2005. Randomised controlled trial of intravenous antibiotic treatment for cellulitis at home compared with hospital. British Medical Journal, 330. COX, N. H. 2006. Oedema as a risk factor for multiple episodes of cellulitis/erysipelas of the lower leg: a series with community follow-up. British Journal of Dermatology, 155, 947-950. CREST 2005. CREST: Cellulitis guidelines. http://www.gain-ni.org/images/Uploads/Guidelines/cellulitis-guide.pdf. CURTIS, L. 2011. Unit Costs of Health and Social Care 2010 : Hospital and other services. The Personal Social Services Research Unit at the University of Kent. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 2006a. English Hospitals Episodes Statistics (Financial year 2004–2005). DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH 2006b. Secretary of State for Health. Improve Healthcare by Reducing Unnecessary Emergency Admissions. EAGLE, M. 2007. Understanding cellulitis of the lower leg. Wounds Essentials, 2, 34-44. ELLIS SIMONSEN, S. M., VAN ORMAN, E. R. & HATCH, B. E. 2006. Cellulitis incidence in a defined population. Epidermiol Infect, 134, 293-299. GUNDERSON, C. 2011. Cellulitis: definition, etiology and clinical features. American Journal of Medicine, 124, 1113-22. HALPERN, J., HOLDER, R. & LANGFORD, N. J. 2008. Ethnicity and other risk factors for acute lower limb cellulitis: a U.K.-based prospective case-control study. The British journal of dermatology, 158, 1288-1292. HAYDOCK, S. F., BORNSHIN, S., WALL, E. C. & CONNICK, R. M. 2007. Admissions to a U.K. teaching hospital with non-necrotizing lower limb cellulitis show a marked seasonal variation. British journal of dermatology, 157. HIRSCHMANN, J. V. & RAUGI, G. J. 2012a. Lower limb cellulitis and its mimics: Part I. Lower limb cellulitis. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 67, 163.e1-163.e12. HIRSCHMANN, J. V. & RAUGI, G. J. 2012b. Lower limb cellulitis and its mimics: Part II. Conditions that simulate lower limb cellulitis. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 67, 177.e1-177.e9. JENG, A., BEHESHTI, M., LI, J. & NATHAN, R. 2010. The role of beta-hemolytic streptococci in causing diffuse, nonculturable cellulitis: a prospective investigation. Medicine (Baltimore), 89, 217-226. LAZZARINI, L., CONTI, E., TOSITTI, G. & DE LALLA, F. 2005. Erysipelas and cellulitis: clinical and microbiological spectrum in an Italian tertiary care hospital. J Infect, 51, 383-9. LEE, C. Y., TSAI, H. C., KUNIN, C. M., LEE, S. S. & CHEN, Y. S. 2015. Clinical and microbiological characteristics of purulent and non-purulent cellulitis in hospitalized Taiwanese adults in the era of community-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. BMC Infect Dis, 15, 311. LEVELL, N. J., WINGFIELD, C. G. & GARIOCH, J. J. 2011. Severe lower limb cellulitis is best diagnosed by dermatologists and managed with shared care between primary and secondary care. British journal of dermatology, 164, 1326-8. MORAN, G., KRISHNADASAN, A., GORWITZ, R., FOSHEIM, G., MCDOUGAL, L. & CAREY, R. 2006. Methicillin-resistant S. aureus infections among patients in the emergency department. New England Journal of Medicine, 355. NICE. 2015. National Institute for Health and Care Excellence: Clnical Knowledge Summaries - Cellulitis [Online]. Available: http://cks.nice.org.uk/cellulitis-acute#!diagnosissub. OPOKU, F. 2015. Ten top tips for improving the diagnosis of cellulitis in the lower limb. Wounds Essentials, 10. SOO, J. K., BICANIC, T. A., HEENAN, S. & MORTIMER, P. S. 2008. Lymphatic abnormalities demonstrated by lymphoscintigraphy after lower limb cellulitis. Br J Dermatol, 158, 1350-3. WINGFIELD, C. 2012. Diagnosing and managing lower limb cellulitis. Nursing Times, 108, 18-21.  

Cellulitis of the lower limbs: incidence, diagnosis and management

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

University of Huddersfield Repository