You are here

Article Text

Article menu

Download PDFPDF

Miscellaneous
Research Letter
Erroneous treatment of syphilis with benzyl penicillin in an era with benzathine benzylpenicillin shortages
  1. Silvia Nieuwenburg1,
  2. Noor Rietbergen1,
  3. Danielle van Zuylen2,
  4. Clarissa Vergunst1,
  5. Henry de Vries1,3
  1. 1 Department of Infectious Diseases, Public Health Service, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  2. 2 General Practitioners Practice Keizersgracht, Amsterdam, Noord-Holland, The Netherlands
  3. 3 Department of Dermatology, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam Institute for Infection and Immunity (AI&II), Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to Ms Silvia Nieuwenburg, GGD Amsterdam, Amsterdam 1018 WT, The Netherlands; snieuwenburg{at}ggd.amsterdam.nl

https://doi.org/10.1136/sextrans-2019-054380

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    Request Permissions

    If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

    The WHO estimates there are 5.6 million new cases of syphilis annually.1 The recommended choice of treatment for syphilis is 2.4 million units of benzathine benzylpenicillin (BBP), also called benzathine penicillin G, with no documented risk of antibiotic resistance. In 2015, the WHO began to receive country reports of BBP stock-outs.2 As with many off-patent drugs, the price competition of BBP is stiff. As a result, many manufacturers have discontinued production, and the stock-out risk has increased.3 From 2015 onwards, the Netherlands has been confronted with BBP stock-outs.

    At the STI clinic in Amsterdam, we were recently confronted with a treatment failure in a patient with syphilis who was treated with benzylpenicillin (BP) intramuscular injections …

    View Full Text