American Society of Hirudotherapy

Analysis of antibiotic resistant infections associated with hirudotherapy

Brauer PR, Saadah M, Fritz MA, Wu SS, Lamarre ED (2024) · American Journal of Otolaryngology · n=19

RCT evidence detailTrial reference
GRADE LowCohort / case series
Sample size of this trial compared with other venous-congestion-flap trialsMarquard JM 20251215Bishop JL 2023843Doğan S 2024570Troeltzsch M 2016330Kucur C 2015260Wang ZD 2022210Lehnhardt M 202196Kruer RM 201459Mozafari N 201056Brauer PR 202419
This trial (highlighted) by sample size alongside other indexed venous-congestion-flap trials. Larger trials generally carry more statistical weight.

Study Profile

Design
retrospective cohort analysis of all hirudotherapy-related adverse events (FDA product code NRN) reported to the FDA MAUDE database from 2012-2021 (Cleveland Clinic Head and Neck Institute + Case Western Reserve, USA)
Sample size (n)
19
Intervention
Whole-leech medicinal leech therapy in patients reported to MAUDE for adverse events involving antibiotic resistance (any organism, any clinical setting)
Comparator
Not applicable — descriptive cohort with no comparator arm
Primary endpoint
Incidence and microbiology of antibiotic-resistant infections after hirudotherapy
Primary result
19 cases of antibiotic-resistant hirudotherapy infections identified; 16/19 (84.2%) associated with patient injury; positive cultures or fever in 26.3%; Aeromonas hydrophila most common (13/19, 68.4%), followed by Vibrio vulnificus (3/19), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (2/19), Proteus vulgaris (1/19); 9/19 (47.4%) multi-drug resistant; resistance documented to fluoroquinolones (47.4%), TMP-SMX (47.4%), and ertapenem (21.1% — a drug of last resort)
Follow-up duration
10-year MAUDE reporting window (2012-2021)

Key Findings

  • 19 MAUDE reports of antibiotic-resistant infections after hirudotherapy (2012-2021)
  • Aeromonas hydrophila accounts for 68.4% — consistent with the established leech-gut symbiont profile
  • Vibrio vulnificus (15.8%) emerges as a new concern requiring different prophylactic coverage than ciprofloxacin
  • 47.4% multi-drug resistance and 21.1% ertapenem resistance represent escalating stewardship pressure
  • Findings support shift toward culture-directed therapy and avoidance of empiric fluoroquinolone monotherapy

Limitations

  • MAUDE is a voluntary passive surveillance database — significant underreporting likely
  • No denominator data (total hirudotherapy procedures performed) — cannot estimate incidence
  • No standardized infection definitions across reports
  • Some reports lacked complete antibiogram data
  • Single-decade window may miss emerging-resistance trends from earlier hirudotherapy

Clinical Implications

Brauer 2024 is now the largest US dataset documenting antibiotic-resistant infection trends in hirudotherapy and directly informs ASH stewardship guidance. For US clinicians using leech therapy under K040187, the data argue for (1) culture-directed antibiotic selection rather than reflexive ciprofloxacin monotherapy, (2) coverage that anticipates Vibrio vulnificus in maritime exposure or coastal patient populations, and (3) early infectious-disease consultation when MDR organisms are isolated. The findings also support continued investment in pharmacologic-leeching alternatives (Harun 2018 bivalirudin) for patients at high MDR risk.

Related Trials

This website provides educational information and does not constitute medical advice, diagnosis, or treatment recommendations. Medicinal leech therapy carries clinically meaningful risks and should be performed only by qualified clinicians under institutionally approved protocols. FDA 510(k) clearance for medicinal leeches is limited to specific indications; investigational and off-label discussions are labeled accordingly. For patient-specific guidance, consult a qualified healthcare provider.