Continuing Education Activity

Toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) is potentially life-threatening acute mucocutaneous Syndrome. It usually occurs because of inappropriate immune reactions to certain drugs. It is characterized by keratinocyte necrosis with separation of the epidermis from the underlying dermis. TEN is rare (1.9 per million adults per year in the United States). However, its mortality rate is high (30% of cases). Prompt recognition of cases and stoppage of the offending drug and referral to burn unit is the mainstay of treatment. This activity will review the evaluation and management f TEN cases and highlight the importance of an interprofessional team approach in evaluating these cases.

Objectives:

• Describe the pathophysiology of toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN).
• Explain the most common clinical features of TEN.
• Differentiate between TEN and other exfoliative skin conditions, including Steven-Johnson Syndrome (SJS).
• Identify the importance of early intervention and describe different treatment options.

Introduction

Toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) is a potentially life-threatening condition characterized by extensive exfoliation of the epidermis and mucous membrane, which may result in sepsis and death. It was initially described by Alan Lyell in 1956 as “an eruption resembling scalding of the skin."[1]

In most cases, TEN occurs as a consequence of an immune reaction to certain drugs. Nevertheless, infection, tumors, and vaccination have been reported as potential causes. Steven-Johnson Syndrome (SJS) shows the same disease process and is considered to be in the same spectrum of drug-induced epidermolysis. The main difference is the extent of skin detachment. TEN usually involves more than 30% of the total body surface area, while SJS affects less than 10%.[2]

Etiology

TEN can be induced by medications, infections, vaccines, or even idiopathic. Reaction to certain drugs is by far the most common cause. Various medications have been linked to TEN, including antibiotics (sulfonamides, chloramphenicol, penicillins, and quinolones), antiepileptics (barbiturate, carbamazepine, phenytoin, valproate, and lamotrigine), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID), especially oxybutazone and piroxicam, antiviral drugs (oseltamivir and abacavir), and allopurinol. According to the 2008 Euro-SCAR study, the drugs with a high risk of TEN are lamotrigine, carbamazepine, phenytoin, nevirapine, phenobarbital, sulfonamide, sulfasalazine, allopurinol, and oxicam-NSAIDs.[3][4][5] Most of the cases present within the first 4 weeks of the initiation of the treatment.[6]

Other potential etiologies include infections such as mycoplasma pneumoniae, hepatitis A and human herpesvirus 7, malignancies such as hepatocellular carcinoma and lung cancer, and vaccination especially meningococcal vaccine.[7][8][9] More recently, TEN has been reported in COVID-19 patients due to either the viral infection or the medications used in the course of treatment.[10][11]

Epidemiology

The estimated incidence of TEN in the United States is 1.9 per million adults per year, while SJS affects around 9.3 per million people per year.[12] Worldwide, there are numerous reports. In 1996, a German study estimated the yearly prevalence per million of both SJS and TEN cases to be around 1.9.[13] The reported figure for both SJS and TEN cases in the United Kingdom between 1995 and 2013 is as high as 5.76 cases per million inhabitants per year.[14] While in Japan, TEN affects around one patient per million adults per year.[15]

Most studies report that Asian and black patients are more susceptible compared to the white population. Some studies report a two-fold risk increase in the Asian and black populations. There is a clear female sex predilection with a female to male ratio of 1.5 to 1.[16] The majority of patients with TEN are between the 5th and7th decade of life. However, it can affect any age group. In general, adult cases are mainly drug-induced, while infections are the main cause in children.[12] Many recent studies highlighted the association between different HLA alleles and the development of TEN, especially in the Southeast Asian population.[17][18][19]

Pathophysiology

TEN was previously considered to be related to Fas-Fas ligand or granulysin-mediated apoptosis. More recent studies suggested the reactive oxygen species (ROS) as the initiating factor for keratinocyte damage and that it precedes the activation of the beforementioned apoptotic systems.

Fas is a membrane-bound protein responsible for the initiation of programmed cell death through a series of intracellular events. Fas ligand (FasL), which is usually produced by cytotoxic T(CTL) cells and natural killer (NK) cells, tends to bind to Fas on target cells, initiating apoptosis. The fact that the number of these cells is low in skin biopsies taken from TEN patients indicates that they are not the source of FasL.[20] Virad et al. study in 1998 found a high level of keratinocyte localization of FasL. This suggests that keratinocytes may be responsible for their own death.[21] Granulysin is a pro-apoptotic protein that was also detected in TEN blisters. It is one of many cytotoxic molecules secreted by CTL and NK cells that lead to cell-mediated cytotoxicity.[22] 

Oxidative stress is one of the proposed theories of TEN. Glutathione S-transferase-p (GST-p) is a biomarker of oxidative stress in keratinocytes. A higher level of this marker has been detected in TEN patients compared to other cutaneous drug reactions.[23] The culprit drug may interfere with the detoxification pathways resulting in the accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS), triggering programmed cell death.[24]

Histopathology

TEN is characterized by extensive full-thickness epidermal necrosis with subsequent epidermal detachment. There is little evidence of dermal or epidermal inflammation, as few mononuclear cells can be seen in skin biopsies. In the early stage, satellite cell necrosis occurs, which then progresses to extensive eosinophilic necrosis. Histological evaluation includes immunofluorescence analysis of the skin specimen to differentiate it from other exfoliative skin conditions.[25]

History and Physical

Most cases of TEN are drug-induced, and it usually occurs within 1 to 3 weeks of initiation of treatment. Therefore, a detailed medication history, especially one recently started, is a pivotal part of the patient’s history. Nevertheless, around 5% of reported cases show no history of recent drug utilization.[6]

Most patients report a prodrome of influenza-like symptoms (fever, malaise, arthralgia, rhinitis, and headache), which may last between 1 to 21 days. Then, cutaneous eruption ensues as an ill-defined dusky erythematous macular rash and bullae, which then coalesces to form sheet-like blisters. These blisters can easily slough, leaving a characteristic moist denuded dermis. They usually start in the face, presternal area before affecting the whole torso. However, the scalp area remains spared in almost all cases. The pain usually precedes the vesicular eruption. Applying slight pressure on the epidermis leads to epidermal detachment from the underlying surface (positive Nikolsky sign). This is not characteristic for TEN cases as it can occur with other exfoliative skin conditions, e.g., autoimmune bullous skin diseases. The progression of the cutaneous eruption is highly variable. In most patients, it occurs over a period of 2 weeks. However, it can abruptly evolve to affect the whole body within 24 hours. In severe cases, it may also occur in areas of reepithelialization. Evaluation of the surface area of the affected skin is important to differentiate TEN from SJS. It is essential to emphasize that only detached skin (i.e., blisters or erosions) or the potentially detachable skin (Positive Nikolsky sign) should be included when calculating the affected body surface area.[26]

Mucosal affection (erythema and erosion) occurs in 90% of cases and generally precedes skin eruption by 1 to 3 days. The oropharynx, eye, and genitalia are the most frequently affected mucosal membranes. However, other areas have been reported, including the respiratory tract and gastrointestinal tract.[27][28] Respiratory involvement may lead to serious pulmonary disease even with a normal chest radiograph. Initial ocular affection is common and can range from acute conjunctivitis, eyelid edema, and erythema to more severe forms, including corneal ulceration.[29][30] The release of a massive amount of cytokines may lead to major metabolic disturbances, including sepsis, multiorgan failure, and gastrointestinal hemorrhage. This is the cause of the high mortality rate associated with TEN (30% of cases).[31]

Evaluation

TEN is a clinical diagnosis that is confirmed by early histological analysis of the affected skin. Early skin biopsy confirms the diagnosis and guides the treatment plan.  A frozen section may be helpful to expedite the diagnosis. Histological evaluation of the skin biopsy should include immunofluorescent analysis to differentiate TEN from other dermatological diseases. There are no specific blood tests to diagnose TEN. However, a basic screen including (complete blood count, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, coagulation studies, urea and electrolytes, and liver function) is essential to plan supportive treatment, detect organ failure, and assess the overall prognosis. Anemia and lymphopenia are common. However, the presence of neutropenia is an unfavorable prognostic factor.[32] 

Coagulation profile and blood count should be kept within the normal values, especially in patients with extensive mucosal affection, as this may put them at risk of severe bleeding, especially from the gastrointestinal system. Transfusion of blood or blood products may be considered in some cases.[16]

Imaging studies are not essential for the diagnosis of TEN. However, it can be used to assess complications such as chest radiographs in cases of pulmonary affection. Another useful test is the patch test which may be helpful to identify the causative agent in around 50% of patients.[33]

The score of TEN (SCORTEN scale) is a tool to assess the severity of illness and to predict mortality rate. It contains 7 independent variables assessed in the first 24 hours of presentation to the hospital, and it gives an indication of mortality rate. This includes the age of >40 years, heart rate of ≥120 beats per minute, presence of cancer or hematological malignancy, affected body surface area of ≥10% within the first day, serum BUN of >28 mg/dL, serum bicarbonate of <20 mEq/L, and serum glucose of >252 mg/dL.  According to these risk factors, a patient's mortality score can vary from 3.2% (if only one risk factor presents) to >90% (if 5 or more risk factors are present).[31]

Table

SCORTEN 0-1  SCORTEN 2 

Treatment / Management

The mainstay treatment of TEN is supportive care until re-epithelialization of the affected skin. Supportive measures include fluid resuscitation, pain management, wound care, and nutritional support. Early management of these cases in the emergency department should focus mainly on two things: discontinuation of the offending drug and early referral to a burn unit or intensive care unit with experience in dealing with such cases. When taken in the first 24 hours of blister formation, these two measures decrease infection rate and hospital stays and improve the overall survival.[34]

The airway should be observed frequently, along with the provision of supplemental oxygen via a face mask if needed. In case of respiratory distress, endotracheal intubation should be done by an expert. Fluid resuscitation using crystalloids should be guided by one of the standard burn resuscitation Performa (e.g., Parkland formula). The target of resuscitation should be to maintain adequate tissue perfusion by achieving an adequate mean arterial blood pressure (ABP>65mm Hg), a central venous pressure between 8 to 12 mmHg, and a urine output of 0.5 to 1 ml/kg/hour.[16][35] Pain management is extremely important to decrease patient’s distress. Opiates or patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) can be used. The non-adhesive sterile dressing should be used to dress areas of skin erosions, and care should be taken to prevent hypothermia, especially in the prehospital setting.[34]

Nutritional support is crucial in TEN patients due to the hypercatabolic nature of this disease. Enteral feeding is superior to parenteral feeding as it decreases the risk of bacterial translocation. If oral mucosa is significantly affected, a nasogastric tube may be used. Energy requirement and nutritional support must be carefully calculated (aim to 20 to 25 kcal/kg/day).[36][37]

Wound Care

Aseptic wound care is important to prevent secondary infection until re-epithelialization. Skin lesions usually heal within 2 weeks, while mucosal lesions may take longer. There is no standard approach for wound care. No strong evidence to support either early, late, or no debridement of the affected skin. In case of wound debridement, this should be done under general anesthesia. The involved area can be dressed by a variety of options, including biological dressing (e.g., allograft, xenograft, and homograft), biosynthetic dressing (e.g., biobrane), or silver-impregnated dressing. Good wound care will also reduce analgesia requirements.[38][39][40] 

Infection is common and may be lethal. Staphylococcal infection is the most common, followed by pseudomonas infection, which occurs after a prolonged hospitalization.[41] Prophylactic antibiotics are not recommended as there is no change in the survival rates.[42] However, a microbiological assessment of skin lesions should be done on the day of presentation and every 48 hours to detect and treat an early infection. Indications of antibiotic treatment would be evidence of infection in skin swabs, rapid deterioration of the patient's condition, or sudden drop of patient’s temperature. Empirical antibiotics should cover gram-positive and negative organisms along with anaerobes.[34]

Pharmacotherapy

There is no proven effective treatment modality, including systemic steroid, plasmapheresis, cyclosporin, Anti-tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), or intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG).[26][43] All the reported clinical data regarding these medications are anecdotal and mainly based on observational studies. The rarity of TEN cases makes it extremely challenging to achieve high-standard randomized controlled clinical trials to test the efficacy of these treatment modalities. Systemic steroids are commonly used to halt the progression of TEN cases. However, some studies linked steroids to increase mortality incidence. Daily plasmapheresis for 3 days may enhance the elimination of the causative medication, its metabolites, and inflammatory mediators. However, there is no prospective randomized trial to support these findings.[44] TNF- alpha is overexpressed in the affected keratinocytes of skin lesions with a high concentration in skin blisters. Some studies report early resolution of skin lesions with TNF- alpha inhibitors. IVIG also showed encouraging results when started within the first 48 to 72 hours.[45]

Complications

Ocular complications are common and sometimes serious. Early ophthalmological consultation is vital, and treatment usually consists of topical lubricants, antibiotics, or steroid drops. Genitourinary complications are also common. Topical estrogen is used to promote mucosal healing. In severe cases, menstrual suppression may be helpful to minimize the potential risk of vaginal adenosis. According to the clinical presentation, further input may be needed from other specialists, including urology, otolaryngology, and respiratory medicine. Furthermore, all patients with TEN should be assessed for the need for post-discharge psychological support.[34]

Differential Diagnosis

Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and Toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are in the same disease spectrum. The only difference is the severity of skin affection. If epidermal detachment is less than 10% of the total body surface area, it is SJS. While if the affected body surface area is more than 30%, this is considered TEN. Overlap between the two conditions occurs when the affected body surface area is between 10 to 29%. The main differential diagnosis is erythema multiform major (EMM). It mainly affects less than 10% of body surface area and is characterized by the symmetric acral distribution of target lesions with or without blister formation. In contrast, SJS and TEN consist mainly of skin blisters arising on erythematous macules in central distribution (face and trunk). Moreover, 2 or more mucous membranes are involved in 90% of SJS and TEN cases.

Other differential diagnoses include:[46]

• Other drug rashes
• Toxic shock syndrome(usually present with early multiorgan failures and unique cutaneous manifestations in the form of macular rashes affecting palm and soles that later on evolve to desquamation over the period of 14 days)
• Paraneoplastic pemphigus(as a mucocutaneous manifestation of malignancy)
• Exfoliative erythroderma(usually affects skin only and spares mucous membrane and is painless in most of the cases)
• Staphylococcal scalded skin syndrome in children: (evidence of staphylococcal infection, no history of drug intake, and it usually spares mucus membranes)

 Skin biopsy is also an important tool to differentiate TEN and SJS from these disorders.

Prognosis

The reported mortality rate of TEN cases is 25 to 30% compared to 1 to 5% in SJS cases. The prognosis of TEN cases depends on the degree of cutaneous affection.[47] The higher the affected body surface area, the higher the mortality rate.[26][48] Infection is the main cause of death. Other potential lethal complications are adult respiratory distress syndrome, pulmonary embolism, renal and cardiac failure, and gastrointestinal bleeding.[49]

As discussed before, the SCORTEN, formalized by Bastuji-Garin et al., is a valid method for assessing the disease severity and the survival rates of each patient. It is based on 7 variables that need to be evaluated within the first 24 hours of hospital admission. These variables include age, affected body surface area, heart rate, presence of malignancy, serum urea, glucose, and bicarbonate.[31]

Complications

Several complications can occur in TEN patients because of the extensive cutaneous and mucosal membrane involvement. In the early stage, the presence of painful stomatitis may interfere with oral intake with an increased risk of dehydration. Loss of the epithelial barrier increases the risk of infection and septicemia. This may evolve to septic shock and multiorgan failures.[41] In the long term, the involved skin may show signs of hypo or hyperpigmentation, while the affected mucosal surfaces may heal by stenosis and strictures. In females, vulvovaginal involvement is common and can lead to stenosis, vulvar adenosis, and dyspareunia. In men, phimosis is the most common complication.[50]

Ocular complications are one of the most common and serious sequelae of TEN. Therefore, early ophthalmological consultation is advisable in such cases. Corneal ulcer, xerophthalmia, meibomian gland dysfunction, panophthamitis, or even blindness are some of the reported complications.[29] Respiratory complications include pulmonary embolism, adult respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS), and pneumonia.[51] Gastrointestinal complications in the form of extensive bleeding from the affected mucosa, gingival synechia, and xerostomia due to affection of the salivary glands.[52]

Deterrence and Patient Education

It is mandatory to inform patients who have been previously diagnosed with TEN to avoid any future use of the causative drug and any medication from the same class as cross-reactivity is reported.[53] All patients should be educated on sun safety and the use of sunscreen to prevent post-inflammatory pigmentary changes. Some of the patients may need long-term psychological support, and this should be evaluated for all the patients before discharge from the hospital.[54]

Enhancing Healthcare Team Outcomes

Management of TEN cases should be done in an interprofessional team approach to ensure the best outcome. Early transfer to a burn facility or intensive care unit with experienced staff in dealing with complex wounds, fluid resuscitation, and mechanical ventilation improves the overall survival of these patients. Dermatologists have a vital role in identifying and managing these cases.

Plastic consultation is also important to assess the need for debridement of necrotic skin areas. Moreover, the early involvement of ophthalmologists is essential to decrease long-term ocular complications. The respiratory specialist may be needed to assess the need for a pulmonary toilet in cases of pulmonary sloughs. Other specialties such as otolaryngology and urology may also be involved. Additionally, the involvement of the dietitian and physiotherapy team is imperative to optimize the nutrition and mobility of the patient.[34][55][35] [Level 2]

Review Questions

• Access free multiple choice questions on this topic.
• Click here for a simplified version.
• Comment on this article.

References

1.

LYELL A. Toxic epidermal necrolysis: an eruption resembling scalding of the skin. Br J Dermatol. 1956 Nov;68(11):355-61. [PubMed: 13374196]

2.

Bastuji-Garin S, Rzany B, Stern RS, Shear NH, Naldi L, Roujeau JC. Clinical classification of cases of toxic epidermal necrolysis, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and erythema multiforme. Arch Dermatol. 1993 Jan;129(1):92-6. [PubMed: 8420497]

3.

Pejčić AV. Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis associated with the use of macrolide antibiotics: a review of published cases. Int J Dermatol. 2021 Jan;60(1):12-24. [PubMed: 32808293]

4.

Moshfeghi M, Mandler HD. Ciprofloxacin-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis. Ann Pharmacother. 1993 Dec;27(12):1467-9. [PubMed: 8305780]

5.

Mockenhaupt M, Viboud C, Dunant A, Naldi L, Halevy S, Bouwes Bavinck JN, Sidoroff A, Schneck J, Roujeau JC, Flahault A. Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis: assessment of medication risks with emphasis on recently marketed drugs. The EuroSCAR-study. J Invest Dermatol. 2008 Jan;128(1):35-44. [PubMed: 17805350]

6.

Roujeau JC, Kelly JP, Naldi L, Rzany B, Stern RS, Anderson T, Auquier A, Bastuji-Garin S, Correia O, Locati F. Medication use and the risk of Stevens-Johnson syndrome or toxic epidermal necrolysis. N Engl J Med. 1995 Dec 14;333(24):1600-7. [PubMed: 7477195]

7.

Shen MH, Liu MT, Chung WH, Lu CW. Toxic epidermal necrolysis induced by human herpesvirus 7 treated with a tumor necrosis factor-α inhibitor. J Dermatol. 2020 Oct;47(10):1179-1181. [PubMed: 32686137]

8.

Wu J, Lee YY, Su SC, Wu TS, Kao KC, Huang CC, Chang WC, Yang CH, Chung WH. Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis in patients with malignancies. Br J Dermatol. 2015 Nov;173(5):1224-31. [PubMed: 26218033]

9.

Chahal D, Aleshin M, Turegano M, Chiu M, Worswick S. Vaccine-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis: A case and systematic review. Dermatol Online J. 2018 Jan 15;24(1) [PubMed: 29469759]

10.

Narang I, Panthagani AP, Lewis M, Chohan B, Ferguson A, Nambi R. COVID-19-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2021 Jul;46(5):927-929. [PMC free article: PMC8014080] [PubMed: 33511662]

11.

Lagziel T, Quiroga L, Ramos M, Hultman CS, Asif M. Two False Negative Test Results in a Symptomatic Patient with a Confirmed Case of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) and Suspected Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis (SJS/TEN). Cureus. 2020 May 19;12(5):e8198. [PMC free article: PMC7243064] [PubMed: 32455090]

12.

Hsu DY, Brieva J, Silverberg NB, Silverberg JI. Morbidity and Mortality of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis in United States Adults. J Invest Dermatol. 2016 Jul;136(7):1387-1397. [PubMed: 27039263]

13.

Rzany B, Mockenhaupt M, Baur S, Schröder W, Stocker U, Mueller J, Holländer N, Bruppacher R, Schöpf E. Epidemiology of erythema exsudativum multiforme majus, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis in Germany (1990-1992): structure and results of a population-based registry. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996 Jul;49(7):769-73. [PubMed: 8691227]

14.

Frey N, Jossi J, Bodmer M, Bircher A, Jick SS, Meier CR, Spoendlin J. The Epidemiology of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis in the UK. J Invest Dermatol. 2017 Jun;137(6):1240-1247. [PubMed: 28202399]

15.

Sunaga Y, Kurosawa M, Ochiai H, Watanabe H, Sueki H, Azukizawa H, Asada H, Watanabe Y, Yamaguchi Y, Aihara M, Mizukawa Y, Ohyama M, Hama N, Abe R, Hashizume H, Nakajima S, Nomura T, Kabashima K, Tohyama M, Takahashi H, Mieno H, Ueta M, Sotozono C, Niihara H, Morita E, Kokaze A. The nationwide epidemiological survey of Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis in Japan, 2016-2018. J Dermatol Sci. 2020 Dec;100(3):175-182. [PubMed: 33046331]

16.

Struck MF, Hilbert P, Mockenhaupt M, Reichelt B, Steen M. Severe cutaneous adverse reactions: emergency approach to non-burn epidermolytic syndromes. Intensive Care Med. 2010 Jan;36(1):22-32. [PubMed: 19787334]

17.

Hung SI, Chung WH, Liou LB, Chu CC, Lin M, Huang HP, Lin YL, Lan JL, Yang LC, Hong HS, Chen MJ, Lai PC, Wu MS, Chu CY, Wang KH, Chen CH, Fann CS, Wu JY, Chen YT. HLA-B*5801 allele as a genetic marker for severe cutaneous adverse reactions caused by allopurinol. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2005 Mar 15;102(11):4134-9. [PMC free article: PMC554812] [PubMed: 15743917]

18.

Locharernkul C, Loplumlert J, Limotai C, Korkij W, Desudchit T, Tongkobpetch S, Kangwanshiratada O, Hirankarn N, Suphapeetiporn K, Shotelersuk V. Carbamazepine and phenytoin induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome is associated with HLA-B*1502 allele in Thai population. Epilepsia. 2008 Dec;49(12):2087-91. [PubMed: 18637831]

19.

Man CB, Kwan P, Baum L, Yu E, Lau KM, Cheng AS, Ng MH. Association between HLA-B*1502 allele and antiepileptic drug-induced cutaneous reactions in Han Chinese. Epilepsia. 2007 May;48(5):1015-8. [PubMed: 17509004]

20.

Abe R. Toxic epidermal necrolysis and Stevens-Johnson syndrome: soluble Fas ligand involvement in the pathomechanisms of these diseases. J Dermatol Sci. 2008 Dec;52(3):151-9. [PubMed: 18657400]

21.

Viard I, Wehrli P, Bullani R, Schneider P, Holler N, Salomon D, Hunziker T, Saurat JH, Tschopp J, French LE. Inhibition of toxic epidermal necrolysis by blockade of CD95 with human intravenous immunoglobulin. Science. 1998 Oct 16;282(5388):490-3. [PubMed: 9774279]

22.

Chung WH, Hung SI, Yang JY, Su SC, Huang SP, Wei CY, Chin SW, Chiou CC, Chu SC, Ho HC, Yang CH, Lu CF, Wu JY, Liao YD, Chen YT. Granulysin is a key mediator for disseminated keratinocyte death in Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis. Nat Med. 2008 Dec;14(12):1343-50. [PubMed: 19029983]

23.

Paquet P, Piérard GE. Glutathione-S-transferase pi expression in toxic epidermal necrolysis: a marker of putative oxidative stress in keratinocytes. Skin Pharmacol Physiol. 2007;20(2):66-70. [PubMed: 17139195]

24.

Hayes JD, Pulford DJ. The glutathione S-transferase supergene family: regulation of GST and the contribution of the isoenzymes to cancer chemoprotection and drug resistance. Crit Rev Biochem Mol Biol. 1995;30(6):445-600. [PubMed: 8770536]

25.

Schwartz RA, McDonough PH, Lee BW. Toxic epidermal necrolysis: Part I. Introduction, history, classification, clinical features, systemic manifestations, etiology, and immunopathogenesis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013 Aug;69(2):173.e1-13; quiz 185-6. [PubMed: 23866878]

26.

Pereira FA, Mudgil AV, Rosmarin DM. Toxic epidermal necrolysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007 Feb;56(2):181-200. [PubMed: 17224365]

27.

French LE. Toxic epidermal necrolysis and Stevens Johnson syndrome: our current understanding. Allergol Int. 2006 Mar;55(1):9-16. [PubMed: 17075281]

28.

Brown CS, Defazio JR, An G, O'Connor A, Whitcomb E, Hart J, Gottlieb LJ. Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis with Gastrointestinal Involvement: A Case Report and Review of the Literature. J Burn Care Res. 2017 Jan/Feb;38(1):e450-e455. [PubMed: 27058583]

29.

Sotozono C, Ueta M, Koizumi N, Inatomi T, Shirakata Y, Ikezawa Z, Hashimoto K, Kinoshita S. Diagnosis and treatment of Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis with ocular complications. Ophthalmology. 2009 Apr;116(4):685-90. [PubMed: 19243825]

30.

Chang YS, Huang FC, Tseng SH, Hsu CK, Ho CL, Sheu HM. Erythema multiforme, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and toxic epidermal necrolysis: acute ocular manifestations, causes, and management. Cornea. 2007 Feb;26(2):123-9. [PubMed: 17251797]

31.

Bastuji-Garin S, Fouchard N, Bertocchi M, Roujeau JC, Revuz J, Wolkenstein P. SCORTEN: a severity-of-illness score for toxic epidermal necrolysis. J Invest Dermatol. 2000 Aug;115(2):149-53. [PubMed: 10951229]

32.

Wolkenstein PE, Roujeau JC, Revuz J. Drug-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis. Clin Dermatol. 1998 May-Jun;16(3):399-408. [PubMed: 9642534]

33.

Stingeni L, Bianchi L, Tramontana M, Pigatto PD, Patruno C, Corazza M, Foti C, Fabbrocini G, Micali G, Romita P, Napolitano M, Hansel K. Skin tests in the diagnosis of adverse drug reactions. G Ital Dermatol Venereol. 2020 Oct;155(5):602-621. [PubMed: 32938165]

34.

Seminario-Vidal L, Kroshinsky D, Malachowski SJ, Sun J, Markova A, Beachkofsky TM, Kaffenberger BH, Ergen EN, Mauskar M, Bridges A, Calhoun C, Cardones AR, Chen ST, Chodosh J, Cotliar J, Davis MDP, DeNiro KL, Dominguez AR, Eljure-Téllez J, Femia A, Fox LP, Guda A, Mitchell C, Mostaghimi A, Ortega-Loayza AG, Owen C, Pasieka H, Rahnama-Moghadam S, Saeed HN, Saunderson RB, Shanbhag S, Sharon VR, Strowd L, Venkatesh S, Wanat KA, Wetter DA, Worswick S, Micheletti RG. Society of Dermatology Hospitalists supportive care guidelines for the management of Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis in adults. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020 Jun;82(6):1553-1567. [PubMed: 32151629]

35.

Endorf FW, Cancio LC, Gibran NS. Toxic epidermal necrolysis clinical guidelines. J Burn Care Res. 2008 Sep-Oct;29(5):706-12. [PubMed: 18695603]

36.

Woolum JA, Bailey AM, Baum RA, Metts EL. A Review of the Management of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis. Adv Emerg Nurs J. 2019 Jan/Mar;41(1):56-64. [PubMed: 30702535]

37.

Koh MJ, Tay YK. An update on Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis in children. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2009 Aug;21(4):505-10. [PubMed: 19474732]

38.

Boorboor P, Vogt PM, Bechara FG, Alkandari Q, Aust M, Gohritz A, Spies M. Toxic epidermal necrolysis: use of Biobrane or skin coverage reduces pain, improves mobilisation and decreases infection in elderly patients. Burns. 2008 Jun;34(4):487-92. [PubMed: 17919820]

39.

Dorafshar AH, Dickie SR, Cohn AB, Aycock JK, O'Connor A, Tung A, Gottlieb LJ. Antishear therapy for toxic epidermal necrolysis: an alternative treatment approach. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008 Jul;122(1):154-160. [PubMed: 18594400]

40.

Huang SH, Wu SH, Sun IF, Lee SS, Lai CS, Lin SD, Lin TM. AQUACEL Ag in the treatment of toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN). Burns. 2008 Feb;34(1):63-6. [PubMed: 17618057]

41.

Revuz J, Penso D, Roujeau JC, Guillaume JC, Payne CR, Wechsler J, Touraine R. Toxic epidermal necrolysis. Clinical findings and prognosis factors in 87 patients. Arch Dermatol. 1987 Sep;123(9):1160-5. [PubMed: 3632000]

42.

Palmieri TL, Greenhalgh DG, Saffle JR, Spence RJ, Peck MD, Jeng JC, Mozingo DW, Yowler CJ, Sheridan RL, Ahrenholz DH, Caruso DM, Foster KN, Kagan RJ, Voigt DW, Purdue GF, Hunt JL, Wolf S, Molitor F. A multicenter review of toxic epidermal necrolysis treated in U.S. burn centers at the end of the twentieth century. J Burn Care Rehabil. 2002 Mar-Apr;23(2):87-96. [PubMed: 11882797]

43.

Ririe MR, Blaylock RC, Morris SE, Jung JY. Intravenous immune globulin therapy for Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis complicated by hemolysis leading to pigment nephropathy and hemodialysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013 Aug;69(2):221-5. [PubMed: 23673282]

44.

Chaidemenos GC, Chrysomallis F, Sombolos K, Mourellou O, Ioannides D, Papakonstantinou M. Plasmapheresis in toxic epidermal necrolysis. Int J Dermatol. 1997 Mar;36(3):218-21. [PubMed: 9159011]

45.

Kohanim S, Palioura S, Saeed HN, Akpek EK, Amescua G, Basu S, Blomquist PH, Bouchard CS, Dart JK, Gai X, Gomes JA, Gregory DG, Iyer G, Jacobs DS, Johnson AJ, Kinoshita S, Mantagos IS, Mehta JS, Perez VL, Pflugfelder SC, Sangwan VS, Sippel KC, Sotozono C, Srinivasan B, Tan DT, Tandon R, Tseng SC, Ueta M, Chodosh J. Stevens-Johnson Syndrome/Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis--A Comprehensive Review and Guide to Therapy. I. Systemic Disease. Ocul Surf. 2016 Jan;14(1):2-19. [PubMed: 26549248]

46.

Bachot N, Roujeau JC. Differential diagnosis of severe cutaneous drug eruptions. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2003;4(8):561-72. [PubMed: 12862499]

47.

Roujeau JC, Stern RS. Severe adverse cutaneous reactions to drugs. N Engl J Med. 1994 Nov 10;331(19):1272-85. [PubMed: 7794310]

48.

Letko E, Papaliodis DN, Papaliodis GN, Daoud YJ, Ahmed AR, Foster CS. Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis: a review of the literature. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2005 Apr;94(4):419-36; quiz 436-8, 456. [PubMed: 15875523]

49.

Mukasa Y, Craven N. Management of toxic epidermal necrolysis and related syndromes. Postgrad Med J. 2008 Feb;84(988):60-5. [PubMed: 18322124]

50.

Meneux E, Wolkenstein P, Haddad B, Roujeau JC, Revuz J, Paniel BJ. Vulvovaginal involvement in toxic epidermal necrolysis: a retrospective study of 40 cases. Obstet Gynecol. 1998 Feb;91(2):283-7. [PubMed: 9469290]

51.

Lebargy F, Wolkenstein P, Gisselbrecht M, Lange F, Fleury-Feith J, Delclaux C, Roupie E, Revuz J, Roujeau JC. Pulmonary complications in toxic epidermal necrolysis: a prospective clinical study. Intensive Care Med. 1997 Dec;23(12):1237-44. [PMC free article: PMC7095164] [PubMed: 9470079]

52.

Lee HY, Walsh SA, Creamer D. Long-term complications of Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis (SJS/TEN): the spectrum of chronic problems in patients who survive an episode of SJS/TEN necessitates multidisciplinary follow-up. Br J Dermatol. 2017 Oct;177(4):924-935. [PubMed: 28144971]

53.

Lam A, Randhawa I, Klaustermeyer W. Cephalosporin induced toxic epidermal necrolysis and subsequent penicillin drug exanthem. Allergol Int. 2008 Sep;57(3):281-4. [PubMed: 18566552]

54.

O'Reilly P, Kennedy C, Meskell P, Coffey A, Delaunois I, Dore L, Howard S, Ramsay B, Scanlon C, Wilson DM, Whelan B, Ryan S. The psychological impact of Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis on patients' lives: a Critically Appraised Topic. Br J Dermatol. 2020 Sep;183(3):452-461. [PMC free article: PMC7687230] [PubMed: 31792924]

55.

Creamer D, Walsh SA, Dziewulski P, Exton LS, Lee HY, Dart JK, Setterfield J, Bunker CB, Ardern-Jones MR, Watson KM, Wong GA, Philippidou M, Vercueil A, Martin RV, Williams G, Shah M, Brown D, Williams P, Mohd Mustapa MF, Smith CH. U.K. guidelines for the management of Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis in adults 2016. Br J Dermatol. 2016 Jun;174(6):1194-227. [PubMed: 27317286]

Disclosure: Amir Labib declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.

Disclosure: Catherine Milroy declares no relevant financial relationships with ineligible companies.