|
Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology and Leprology
Medknow Publications on behalf of The Indian Association of Dermatologists, Venereologists and Leprologists (IADVL)
ISSN: 0378-6323 EISSN: 0973-3922
Vol. 71, Num. 2, 2005, pp. 80-86
|
Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology, Leprology, Vol. 71, No. 2, March-April, 2005, pp. 80-86
Review Article
Cutaneous reactions in nuclear, biological and chemical warfare
Arora Sandeep
Skin Centre, Base Hospital, Delhi
Correspondence Address: Skin Centre, Base Hospital, Delhi Cantt
- 110 010
sarora@vsnl.com
Code Number: dv05027
ABSTRACT
Nuclear, biological and chemical warfare have in recent times been responsible
for an increasing number of otherwise rare dermatoses. Many nations are
now maintaining overt and clandestine stockpiles of such arsenal. With
increasing terrorist threats, these agents of mass destruction pose a
risk to the civilian population. Nuclear and chemical attacks manifest
immediately while biological attacks manifest later. Chemical and biological
attacks pose a significant risk to the attending medical personnel. The
large scale of anticipated casualties in the event of such an occurrence
would need the expertise of all physicians, including dermatologists,
both military and civilian. Dermatologists are uniquely qualified in
this respect. This article aims at presenting a review of the cutaneous
manifestations in nuclear, chemical and biological warfare and their
management.
INTRODUCTION
It is the constant endeavor of warring enemies to use new technologies and means in an attempt to gain advantage.[1],[2],[3] This article aims at increasing awareness among dermatologists of the specific cutaneous manifestations of agents of neclear, biological and chemical (NBC) warfare [Table - 1], [Table - 2].[4] Civilians may encounter these agents during a terrorist or military attack, a riot control operation, or due to accidental exposure during industrial or agricultural use. Military personnel may be exposed during their active use in the battlefield or exposure to areas where the disease may be chronically endemic.
HISTORY
Some weapons not only inflict casualties but manage to strike considerable
fear in the enemy. It is the unique blend of real and perceived danger
that makes nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons so appealing. Nuclear
warfare historically dates back to the bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima
in 1945. Dr. Michihiko Achiya′s diary clearly describes the evolution
of radiation symptoms and the constellation of signs associated with
radiation poisoning.[5]
The earliest mention of biological warfare is found on an Assyrian tablet
dated from 600 BC which refers to a noxious pustule in the ear of grains.
Biological warfare attacks took place at the Black Sea port of Kaffa
(now Feodossia, Ukraine) in 1346. Other examples are the ′yellow
rain′(trichothecene
mycotoxins) attacks in Southeast Asia between 1974 and 1981; the weaponization
of anthrax, botulinum toxin, and aflatoxin;[6] and
the release of sarin nerve gas in a Japanese subway in 1995 by the Aum
Shinrikyo cult.[3] Other examples
include the use of arsenical smoke as early as 1000 BC by the Chinese,
mustard gas by Egypt against Yemen, Agent Orange (a defoliant) during
the Vietnam War, and more recently, vesicants (blistering agents, e.g.
mustard gas) and nerve gas by Iraq.[7]
NUCLEAR WARFARE
The cutaneous effects of a nuclear explosion are always due to one of
three effects: blast injuries (direct and indirect), thermal burns, and
radiation injuries. The majority of energy from a nuclear device is blast
and thermal energy, the same energy released from a conventional bomb.[8]
Thermal burns can be caused directly by the initial explosion or by fires
that are secondary to it. Ionizing radiation, comprising charged alpha
and beta particles, can only penetrate the skin, causing an initial erythema
that can progress to superficial and deep ulcers. Conversely, gamma rays,
X-rays, and neutrons, all of which have no charge, penetrate deeply into
the body and can cause severe damage to vital tissues. Further cutaneous
damage depends upon the extent of radiation exposure [Table
- 3]. Individuals exposed to ionizing radiation need long term follow
up.[9]
Skin biopsy reveals keratinocyte damage with pyknotic nuclei, severe
dermal edema, and subepidermal vesicle formation. With higher doses,
endothelial cell swelling, intravascular thrombi, and fibrosis can be
seen. Patient contamination poses little risk to medical personnel and
should not hinder appropriate lifesaving measures in an emergency. Management
includes decontamination and wound care. For decontamination, soap and
water, normal saline or povidone iodine and water can be used. Wound
care is similar to that for burns. Sulfhydryl drugs, pentoxifylline and
recently topical tazarotene[10] have
beneficial effects.
BIOLOGICAL WARFARE
Biological warfare (BW) is defined as the ′employment of biological
agents to produce casualties in man or animals or damage to plants.′These
agents are highly virulent, produce severe illness and are usually resistant
to common modes of treatment. They are particularly attractive as they
can be aerosolized, and reach the lower respiratory tract. A list of
such agents and their management are mentioned in [Table
- 2] and [Table
- 4].[11],[12],[13],[14],[15],[16]
Anthrax
Anthrax is primarily a zoonotic disease caused by Bacillus anthracis that
produces a toxin consisting of a protective antigen, edema factor and
a lethal factor. The WHO estimates that 50 kg of anthrax spores released
upwind in a population center of 500,000 could result in up to 95,000
deaths, with a further 125,000 people incapacitated.[17]
When the skin is the portal of entry, the earliest finding is that of
a pruritic macule that progresses through papular, vesicular, or pustular
stages to an ulcer with a blackened, necrotic eschar and surrounding
nonpitting, gelatinous, and painless edema on an exposed surface. Satellite
vesicles and painful regional lymphadenitis are other features. Systemic
features are usually absent, but septic shock and severe edema can occur.
Diagnosis is based on gram stain, cultures or direct immunofluorescence.
Anthrax toxin may be detected in the blood by immunoassays. Organisms
can be demonstrated from a full thickness skin biopsy done from periphery
of a vesicle or eschar. However, the absence of organisms in the biopsy
specimen does not rule out anthrax. Specific management [Table
- 3] includes ciprofloxacin and doxycycline. In 2001, adsorbed anthrax
vaccine was used in the United States in combination with post-exposure
prophylaxis (PEP).
Plague
Because of its high mortality (approximately 200 million deaths throughout
history), Yersinia pestis has
attracted attention for development as a possible BW agent. On inoculation
4-10% individuals may develop a pustule at the inoculation site.[18] Terminal
pneumonic and septicemic plague patients would develop livid cyanosis
and large ecchymoses on the back. Septicemia could cause petechiae, purpura,
ecchymoses, and acral cyanosis and necrosis leading to the infamous description, ′the
Black Death.′Cases
of ecthyma gangrenosum-like lesions and carbuncles due to plague have
been reported.[19]
Investigations include bubo aspiration for direct microscopy, and culture
on blood agar of bubo aspirate, cerebrospinal fluid, blood and sputum.
Isolation of patients for a minimum of 72 hours after detection and accompanying
the administration of antibiotics [Table
- 3] is recommended. PEP must be adopted in those exposed but not
manifesting the clinical features and the medical personnel involved
in the management. An outbreak of endemic plague is heralded by affection
of the mammalian reservoirs first while a BW attack would first affect
the humans.
Tularemia
Tularemia is a zoonosis caused by Francisella tularensis. The
commoner forms include the ulceroglandular form, which involves the skin
and lymph nodes, and the typhoidal form. A cutaneous ulcer occurs in
approximately 60% of patients and is the most common sign of tularemia.[20] Ulcers
are generally single lesions of 0.4 to 3.0 cm in diameter, with heaped-up
edges and accompanied with systemic upset. The organism is difficult
to culture; hence the diagnosis is usually established by serology.[21] A
live, attenuated vaccine is effective against aerosol infection.[20]
Melioidosis
Burkholderia (formerly Pseudomonas) pseudomallei is
a gram-negative bacillus. Cutaneous manifestations include severe urticaria,[22] flushing
and cyanosis. Inhalational melioidosis could lead to pustules or cutaneous
abscesses associated with lymphangitis, cellulitis, or regional lymphadenitis,
but only after metastatic abscesses to the skin are formed, and this
would be likely to take months.[23]
Viral hemorrhagic fevers
Hemorrhagic fever viruses, with the exception of dengue, are potentially
transmitted via aerosol. Cutaneous manifestations are non-specific and
include flushing, petechiae, purpura, ecchymoses, and edema.
ELISA to detect specific IgM antibody responses must be done. One should
not wait for viral cultures, which consume time, to initiate management [Table
- 3]. Management includes supportive care for prevention of hypotension
and shock. Medical personnel need to be protected. Isolation of the patient
during active disease and strict barrier nursing must be adopted. Specific
treatment may include ribavirin. Only yellow fever has a licensed vaccine.[24]
Other viral fevers
The viral species important from the warfare context include variola
(smallpox), monkeypox, and vaccinia. Smallpox has an incubation period
of 7-17 days and a prodrome of 2-4 days. An enanthem on the buccal and
pharyngeal mucosa starts on about the second day. An orderly progress
of macules to papules, vesicles, pustules (sometimes umbilicated), and
crusts distributed in a centrifugal pattern (in distinction to varicella)
over a 1-2 week period is typical. Crusts are infective and detach in
about 3 weeks leaving depressed, hypopigmented scars. Monkeypox greatly
resembles variola, the only distinguishing feature being cervical and
inguinal lymphadenopathy.
Trichothecene mycotoxins
Trichothecene mycotoxins (′Yellow rain′)[25] are
the only potential BW toxins with cutaneous activity and manifestations.
Mycotoxins are a diverse group of small molecular weight compounds produced
by the fungi of five fungal genera: Aspergillus, Penicillium, Fusarium,
Alternaria, and Claviceps. ′Yellow rain′ was
used in Southeast Asia between 1974 and 1981. Most attacks used yellow
pigment, but some used red, green, white, or brown smoke or vapor. Vesication
often occurred with ′yellow rain′attacks.
At low doses (nanograms), severe skin irritation with erythema, edema,
and necrosis is observed.
A mask and full-body clothing are protective. The clothing gear and contaminated
areas of skin should be washed with soap and water followed by a water
rinse. Washing within 4-6 hours of exposure removes 80-98% of
the toxin and prevents death and dermal lesions in experimental animals.
High doses of systemic steroids decrease toxin injury.
Chemical warfare
A chemical warfare (CW) agent is a chemical substance, gaseous, liquid
or solid, which might be employed because of its direct toxic effects
on man, animals and plants.
The intention of chemical warfare is to reduce the enemy′s numbers
by increasing the morbidity. These agents are manmade, volatile, dermally
active and act primarily on the skin, eyes and the upper respiratory
tract.
The general management in all suspected CW attacks includes decontamination
with adequate protection of the attending medical personnel. Skin protection
against chemical weapons is provided by special protective clothing which
may either be impermeable to liquids or which is permeable to air and
moisture but has been treated to prevent chemical weapons agents from
getting through. Individual protective equipment, as used by certain
armies, includes special clothing, gas masks, and antidotes such as atropine
and Fuller′s earth (which absorbs the liquid CW agents).
Vesicants
Vesicants were used widely in World War I and have been a dreaded threat
in every war fought since then. They include the deadly trio of mustards,
arsenicals and phosgene oximes.
Mustards
Mustards derive their name from their color, smell and taste which are
similar to mustard. They are highly toxic in low concentrations to all
organ systems. Clinical manifestations usually occur after four to six
hours. In a follow up of 34,000 Iranians over a 13-20 year period, Khateri
et al noticed skin involvement in 24.5% [Figure
- 1].[7] Skin manifestations
include tenderness with dusky erythema or painless sunburn and hyperpigmentation
involving both exposed and unexposed parts. Parts of the body where the
skin is tender and well supplied with sweat glands are more severely
affected. Itching and burning may be present. The fully developed bulla
is thin walled and yellowish with surrounding erythema. At the end of
twenty-four hours the typical appearance includes progressive, painful,
virtually blinding conjunctivitis with constant rhinorrhea and a blistered
face; the systemic symptoms include intellectual dullness or stupidity,
headache, malaise and exhaustion. Cutaneous healing, with or without
scarring, takes days to months.
Biopsy shows hydropic degeneration of basal cells and a split at the
level of lamina lucida. No specific antidote exists for mustard. Management
includes personal protection, decontamination of the patient, and burns
after care. Topical preparations to ameliorate the effects are albumin,
collagen, powdered milk, gel or collagen dressings, activated charcoal
slurry (for inactivation), ice bags (to cool the skin), trichloroacetic
acid crystal application,[26] vitamin
E and niacin.
Arsenical vesicants
Chlorovinyldichloroarsine, or Lewisite, is an arsenical vesicant. Lewisite
acts like mustard but does not cause immunosuppression. Other differences
include earlier onset of pain (within seconds to minutes of exposure),
a decreased incidence of skin infection, and a shorter healing time (2-3
weeks). Topical application of British anti-Lewisite (BAL) ointment within
5 minutes of exposure and an intramuscular injection of the same may
decrease some of the epidermal and systemic toxicity of Lewisite.
Halogenated oximes
Phosgene oxime (CX) belongs to a class of chemical agents called urticants
or nettle gases. It penetrates rubber and garments much more easily.
Phosgene oxime is not a true vesicant, but it is extremely irritating
to the epidermal and mucosal tissues. Immediate irritation and burning
similar to stinging nettle is followed by urticaria like edema, and blistering
after 24 hours. The skin can become necrotic, and healing may take 3
months or even longer. Specific treatment consists of immediate decontamination
with water and sodium bicarbonate solution.
Nerve agents and cyanides
Five organophosphorous compounds are generally regarded as nerve agents [Table
- 1].
Nerve agents inhibit cholinesterase which then cannot hydrolyze acetyl
choline. They differ from common organophosphorous agents by being much
more toxic. The cutaneous effects of nerve agents are mostly limited
to the areas of exposure. Increased sweating and goose bumps and fasciculations
secondary to the muscarinic-like effect of the agents on eccrine sweat
gland innervation and arrector pilori are evident. Tabun and sarin cause
cyanotic redness and edema of the skin respectively. Treatment of nerve
agents consists of the administration of atropine followed by pralidoxime
chloride to reactivate acetylcholinesterase.
The cyanides (blood agents) act by inactivating cytochrome oxidase, preventing
cellular oxygen utilization. The blood remains oxygenated and the mucosal
membranes and skin of an affected individual appear dark red. The only
effective therapy is amyl nitrite inhalation followed by sodium thiosulfate.
Riot control agents
Agents used in riot control [Table
- 1] are primarily lacrimators, sternutators and vomiting agents.
Cutaneous reactions are secondary and not the primary intentional event.
After an initial burning sensation, erythema develops and persists for
an hour or so. However continual or large exposure results in intense
erythema and vesiculation. Initial exposure may later be followed by
an allergic contact dermatitis.[27] Dermatological
management is as for any dermatitis. Sodium hypochlorite (household bleach)
is useful in the management.
The threat of chemical warfare is ever real and all dermatologists must
be prepared to treat a large number of affected individuals if such an
event occurs. The fact that medical personnel need to adopt adequate
protection, follow strict decontamination procedures and triage during
administration of treatment is what differentiates these casualties from
ordinary accidents involving these chemicals.
CONCLUSION
The primary threat from chemical and biological agents today is from
terrorists. Civilians in densely populated regions are the likely targets.
Therefore, both civilian and military dermatologists need to be aware
of how a biological, chemical or nuclear attack would present, to minimize
its effects. Dermatologists can play a role in recognizing the early
markers of an attack and in its management.
REFERENCES
1. | Update: Investigation of bio terrorism-related anthrax: Connecticut, 2001. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 2001;50:1077-9. Back to cited text no. 1 |
2. | Torok TJ, Tauxe RF, Wise RP, Livengood JR, Sokolow R, Mauvais S, et al. A large community outbreak of salmonellosis caused by intentional contamination of restaurant salad bars. JAMA 1997;278:389-95. Back to cited text no. 2 |
3. | Okumura T, Takasu N, Ishimatasu S, Miyanoki S, Mitsuhashi A, Kumada K, et al. Report on 640 victims of the Tokyo subway sarin attack. Ann Emerg Med 1996;28:129-35. Back to cited text no. 3 |
4. | Rotz LD, Khan AS, Lillibridge SR, Ostroff SM, Hughes JM. Public health assessment of potential biological terrorism agents. Emerg Infect Dis 2002;8:225-30. Back to cited text no. 4 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
5. | Achiya M, Wells W, Trans. The Journal of a Japanese Physician, August 6-September 30, 1945, Hiroshima Diary. Chapel Hill, NC: University of North Carolina Press; 1955. p. 14-5. Back to cited text no. 5 |
6. | Witkowski JA, Parish LC. The story of anthrax from antiquity to the present: A biological weapon of nature and humans. Clin Dermatol 2002;20:336-42. Back to cited text no. 6 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
7. | Khateri S, Ghanei M, Keshavarz S, Soroush M, Haines D. Incidence of lung, eye, and skin lesions as late complications in 34,000 Iranians with wartime exposure to mustard agent. J Occup Environ Med 2003;45:1136-43. Back to cited text no. 7 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
8. | Nuclear warfare. Effects of a nuclear explosion. Available at: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapon.htm. Accessed 7 Aug. 2004. Back to cited text no. 8 |
9. | Steinert M, Weiss M, Gottlober P, Belyi D, Gergel O, Bebeshko V, et al. Delayed effects of accidental cutaneous radiation exposure: Fifteen years of follow-up after the Chernobyl accident. J Am Acad Dermatol 2003;49:417-23. Back to cited text no. 9 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
10. | So PL, Lee K, Hebert J, Walker P, Lu Y, Hwang J, et al. Topical tazarotene chemoprevention reduces Basal cell carcinoma number and size in Ptch1+/- mice exposed to ultraviolet or ionizing radiation. Cancer Res 2004;64:4385-9. Back to cited text no. 10 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
11. | Polyak CS, Macy JT, Irizarry-De La Cruz M, Lai JE, McAuliffe JF, Popovic T, et al. Bioterrorism-related anthrax: International response by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Emerg Infect Dis 2002;8:1056-9. Back to cited text no. 11 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
12. | Inglesby TV, Henderson DA, Bartlett JG, Ascher MS, Eitzen E, Friedlander AM, et al. Anthrax as a biological weapon: medical and public health management Working Group on Civilian Biodefense. JAMA 1999;281:1735-45. Back to cited text no. 12 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
13. | Henderson DA, Inglesby TV, Bartlett JG, Ascher MS, Eitzen E, Jahrling PB, et al. Smallpox as a biological weapon: Medical and public health management Working Group on Civilian Biodefense. JAMA 1999;281:2127-37. Back to cited text no. 13 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
14. | Inglesby TV, Dennis DT, Henderson DA, Bartlett JG, Ascher MS, Eitzen E, et al. Plague as a biological weapon: Medical and public health management. Working Group on Civilian Biodefense. JAMA 2000;283:2281-90. Back to cited text no. 14 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
15. | Arnon SS, Schechter R, Inglesby TV, Henderson DA, Bartlett JG, Ascher MS, et al. Botulinum toxin as a biological weapon: medical and public health management. JAMA 2001;285:1059-70. Back to cited text no. 15 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
16. | Inglesby TV, O'Toole T, Henderson DA, Bartlett JG, Ascher MS, Eitzen E, et al. Anthrax as a biological weapon, 2002: Updated recommendations for management. JAMA 2002;287:2236-52. Back to cited text no. 16 |
17. | Huxsoll DL, Parrott CD, Patrick WC 3rd. Medicine in defense against biological warfare. JAMA 1989;262:677-9. Back to cited text no. 17 [PUBMED] |
18. | Crook LD, Tempest B. Plague: A clinical review of 27 cases. Arch Intern Med 1992;152:1253-6. Back to cited text no. 18 [PUBMED] |
19. | Welty TK, Grabman J, Kompare E, Wood G, Welty E, Van Duzen J, et al. Nineteen cases of plague in Arizona: A spectrum including ecthyma gangrenosum due to plague and plague in pregnancy. West J Med 1985;42:641-6. Back to cited text no. 19 |
20. | Friedlander AM, Evans ME, Tularemia. In: Sidell FR, Takafuji ET, Franz DR, editors. Textbook of military medicine: Medical aspects of chemical and biological warfare, part 1. Washington (DC): Walter Reed Army Medical Center; 1997. p. 503-12. Back to cited text no. 20 |
21. | Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Basic laboratory protocols for the presumptive identification of Francisella tularensis. Available at: http://www.bt.cdc.gov/Agent/Tularemia/tularemia20010417.pdf. accessed on 7 Aug, 2004. Back to cited text no. 21 |
22. | Steck WD, Byrd RB. Urticaria secondary to pulmonary melioidosis. Report of a case. Arch Dermatol 1969;99:80-1. Back to cited text no. 22 [PUBMED] |
23. | Wuthiekanun V, Amornchai P, Chierakul W, Cheng AC, White NJ, Peacock SJ, et al. Evaluation of Immunoglobulin M (IgM) and IgG Rapid Cassette Test Kits for Diagnosis of Melioidosis in an Area of Endemicity. J Clin Microbiol 2004;42:3435-7. Back to cited text no. 23 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
24. | Barrett AD. Current status of the Arilvax; yellow fever vaccine. Expert Rev Vaccines 2004;3:413-20. Back to cited text no. 24 [PUBMED] [FULLTEXT] |
25. | Seely TD, Nowicke JW, Meselson M, Guillemin J, Akratanakkul P. Yellow rain. Sci Am 1985;253:128-37. Back to cited text no. 25 |
26. | Papirmeister B, Feister AJ, Robinson SI, Ford RD. Medical Defense against Mustard Gas, Toxic Mechanisms and Pharmacological Implications. Boston, Mass: CRC Press; 1991. p. 80-2. Back to cited text no. 26 |
27. | Holland P, White RG. The cutaneous reactions produced by o-chlorobenzylidene malononitrile and 1- chloroacetophenone when applied directly to the skin of human subjects. Br J Dermatol 1972;86:150-4. Back to cited text no. 27 [PUBMED] |
Copyright 2005 - Indian Journal of Dermatology, Venereology, Leprology
The following images related to this document are available:
Photo images
[dv05027t3.jpg]
[dv05027t1.jpg]
[dv05027f1.jpg]
[dv05027t2.jpg]
[dv05027t4.jpg]
|