Israel Medical Association Journal

Leeches belong to the class Hirudinea of the phylum Annelida. There are approximately 650 known species of leeches, some terrestrial, some marine, and most freshwater. Although some are predators, most leeches are hematophagous, and all are hermaphrodites [1].

The leeches Limnatis nilotica, Praeodella guineensis, Myxobdella africana, Dinobdella ferox, and Hirudo troctina occasionally invade human orifices such as the eyes, nasopharyngeal region, urethra, vagina, and rectum. They cause mucosal, orificial, vesical, or internal hirudiniasis depending on the location of the leech [1]. Infection usually occurs by drinking contaminated water or bathing in stagnant streams, pools, or springs. While most blood-feeding leeches feed as ectoparasites for short periods of time, those that feed on mucous membranes have been known to remain in an orifice for days or weeks. Hematuria, hemoptysis, hematemesis, epistaxis and rectal bleeding, dysphonia, cough, tickling, and dyspnea may occur [1].

We report the case of a male patient who entered freshwater pools in Israel and was infected with L. nilotica.

Background: Guidelines recommend initiation of parenteral biologic or oral target-specific disease-modifying anti-rheumatic drugs (bDMARDs/tsDMARDs) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients who do not adequately respond to conventional DMARDs.

Objectives: To compare the preferred route of administration of bDMARDs or tsDMARDs in RA patients who were previously treated with at least one type.

Methods: A cross-sectional survey was conducted of consecutive RA patients previously prescribed bDMARDs or tsDMARDs. We analyzed the factors associated with patients' preferred route of administration.

Results: The cohort included 95 patients, mostly female (72.6%), seropositive (81.05%), mean age 63.4 ± 11.9 years. The oral route was preferred by 39 patients (41%) and 56 (59%) preferred the parenteral route. Most patients (65.9%) preferred to continue with their current route (P < 0.001). Switching from a current route was less common with patients who were currently using the oral route (13.3% vs. 38.2%, P = 0.04). Many patients (53.8%) who preferred the oral route had never experienced it before, while this was rare (3.6%) regarding the parenteral route (P = 0.0001). Employment status was associated with preference of the subcutaneous route over the intravenous route of bDMARDs (P = 0.01). Of the 21 patients who had previously experienced both parenteral and oral treatment, 16 (76.2%) preferred the oral route.

Conclusions: RA patients preferred to continue treatment with an administration route they have already experienced. However, when choosing an unexperienced route, significantly more patients preferred the oral route. Our results strengthen the understanding of patient preferences, which could improve drug adherence, compliance, and disease outcome.