Chancroid Differential Diagnosis: A Comprehensive Guide for Clinicians

Chancroid, while rare in the United States and developed nations, remains a critical differential diagnosis in patients presenting with genital ulcer disease. Its clinical presentation can mimic other more prevalent conditions, necessitating a thorough diagnostic approach to ensure accurate management and prevent potential complications. This article delves into the differential diagnosis of chancroid, providing a comprehensive guide for clinicians to effectively distinguish it from other genital ulcerating conditions.

Etiology and Epidemiology of Chancroid

Haemophilus ducreyi, a fastidious gram-negative bacterium, is the causative agent of chancroid. This sexually transmitted infection is characterized by painful genital ulcers and regional lymphadenopathy. Despite its low incidence in developed countries, understanding its epidemiology is crucial, particularly in the context of global health and its association with HIV transmission. Chancroid is more commonly reported in men due to the overt nature of penile lesions, and uncircumcised men exhibit a higher susceptibility. It is important to note its role as a significant cofactor in HIV transmission, with genital ulcers increasing the risk of HIV acquisition dramatically by disrupting mucosal integrity and enhancing viral replication. Conversely, HIV infection can alter the clinical presentation of chancroid, leading to prolonged incubation, multiple lesions, and treatment challenges.

Clinical Presentation: Recognizing Chancroid

Chancroid typically manifests after an incubation period of 4 to 10 days following sexual contact. Initial lesions begin as erythematous papules, rapidly evolving into pustules and subsequently painful ulcers. These ulcers, often described as “soft chancres,” are distinguished by soft, irregular borders and a friable base covered with a yellow-gray exudate that bleeds easily upon manipulation. While lesions are commonly solitary, multiple ulcers can arise from autoinoculation or “kissing lesions.” Without treatment, chancroid ulcers can persist for 1 to 3 months. Regional lymphadenopathy, frequently unilateral and tender, develops in approximately half of affected individuals, with about 25% progressing to suppurative buboes that may rupture spontaneously.

The Challenge of Differential Diagnosis

Diagnosing chancroid based solely on clinical presentation is challenging due to its resemblance to other genital ulcer diseases, most notably syphilis and herpes simplex virus (HSV) infections. This clinical overlap necessitates a systematic approach to differential diagnosis, incorporating clinical findings and laboratory investigations.

Key Considerations in Differential Diagnosis

When evaluating a patient with genital ulcers, several key conditions should be considered in the differential diagnosis of chancroid:

1. Herpes Simplex Virus (HSV) Infection: Genital herpes, caused by HSV-1 or HSV-2, is the most common cause of genital ulcers. Herpes ulcers are typically multiple, vesicular initially, progressing to painful, shallow ulcers. Recurrent outbreaks are characteristic of herpes. Pain is a prominent feature, similar to chancroid. However, herpes ulcers often present with prodromal symptoms like tingling or burning, which are less common in chancroid. Lymphadenopathy can occur in both conditions, but herpetic lymphadenopathy is often less likely to suppurate.

   Alt text: Clinical presentation of genital herpes showing multiple vesicles and ulcers on the penis.

2. Syphilis: Primary syphilis manifests as a painless ulcer known as a chancre. This contrasts sharply with the painful ulcers of chancroid. Syphilitic chancres are typically solitary, indurated with raised, firm borders, and a clean, non-exudative base. Painless regional lymphadenopathy is common in primary syphilis. The timing of ulcer appearance can overlap with chancroid, but the pain and ulcer characteristics are key differentiating factors. Secondary syphilis can present with a wide range of mucocutaneous lesions, but these are generally not ulcerative and occur systemically, unlike the localized genital ulcers of chancroid.

   Alt text: Image depicting a primary syphilis chancre, a classic painless and indurated ulcer on the penis.

3. Granuloma Inguinale (Donovanosis): Granuloma inguinale, caused by Klebsiella granulomatis, is less common in developed countries but should be considered, especially in endemic regions. It presents as painless, progressive ulcerative lesions that are highly vascular and bleed easily upon contact. The ulcers are often beefy red and granulomatous in appearance, distinct from the soft, exudative ulcers of chancroid. Lymphadenopathy is typically absent in granuloma inguinale, further aiding in differentiation.

4. Lymphogranuloma Venereum (LGV): LGV, caused by Chlamydia trachomatis serovars L1, L2, and L3, can initially present with a small, painless genital ulcer, which may be easily missed. The hallmark of LGV is painful inguinal lymphadenopathy (buboes), which can become fluctuant and rupture. While chancroid also presents with painful buboes, the initial ulcer in LGV is often transient and less prominent compared to the characteristic painful ulcer of chancroid. Systemic symptoms like fever and malaise may also be more pronounced in LGV.

5. Behçet’s Disease: This chronic, multisystem inflammatory disorder can cause genital ulcers as part of its clinical spectrum. Behçet’s ulcers are typically painful, recurrent, and can occur in the absence of sexual contact. Oral ulcers and other systemic manifestations such as uveitis and skin lesions are characteristic features of Behçet’s disease and help differentiate it from chancroid, which is purely an infectious STI.

6. Traumatic Ulcers: Genital ulcers can also result from trauma, friction, or chemical irritants. A thorough history is crucial to identify any potential non-infectious causes. Traumatic ulcers are often self-limited and lack the characteristic features of infectious ulcers, and laboratory tests for STIs will be negative.

Diagnostic Approach to Chancroid

Given the clinical overlap with other conditions, a definitive diagnosis of chancroid requires laboratory confirmation. However, due to the fastidious nature of H. ducreyi and limitations in diagnostic availability, a presumptive clinical diagnosis is often made based on the CDC criteria:

1. Painful Genital Ulcer(s): Presence of one or more painful genital ulcers.
2. Clinical Consistency: Clinical presentation of genital ulcers and lymphadenopathy consistent with chancroid.
3. Exclusion of Syphilis: No evidence of Treponema pallidum infection by darkfield microscopy or negative serological test for syphilis at least 7 days post-ulcer onset.
4. Exclusion of Herpes: Negative HSV PCR or culture from the ulcer exudate.

While Gram stain of ulcer exudate may show the characteristic “school of fish” appearance of H. ducreyi, its sensitivity and specificity are poor and unreliable. Culture on special media is the gold standard for definitive diagnosis, but this is not widely available. PCR testing for H. ducreyi is becoming more accessible but is not yet universally available or FDA-approved.

Recommended Diagnostic Tests

In patients suspected of having chancroid, the following diagnostic tests are recommended to rule out other conditions and support a presumptive diagnosis:

• Darkfield microscopy or serological test for syphilis: To rule out primary syphilis. If initial serology is negative and syphilis is still suspected, repeat serology after 7 days.
• HSV PCR or culture: To rule out genital herpes. PCR is generally preferred for its higher sensitivity.
• Gram stain of ulcer exudate: While not definitive for chancroid, it may provide suggestive findings.
• Culture for H. ducreyi: If available, culture on specialized media is the definitive diagnostic test.
• HIV testing: Given the association between chancroid and HIV, HIV testing is recommended for all patients presenting with genital ulcers.

Management and Treatment Implications

Accurate differential diagnosis is crucial as treatment strategies differ for each condition. While chancroid is effectively treated with antibiotics, herpes is managed with antiviral medications, and syphilis requires penicillin. Misdiagnosis can lead to inappropriate treatment, delayed resolution of symptoms, and potential complications.

The CDC recommends the following antibiotic regimens for chancroid:

• Azithromycin 1 g orally in a single dose
• Ceftriaxone 250 mg intramuscularly in a single dose
• Ciprofloxacin 500 mg orally twice daily for 3 days
• Erythromycin base 500 mg orally three times daily for 7 days

Treatment leads to clinical improvement within 1-2 weeks. Fluctuant lymphadenopathy may require needle aspiration or incision and drainage. Sexual partners exposed within 10 days of symptom onset should also be treated.

Conclusion

Chancroid, although rare, remains an important consideration in the differential diagnosis of genital ulcer disease. Its clinical similarities to more common conditions like herpes and syphilis underscore the necessity for a systematic diagnostic approach. Clinicians must be vigilant in considering chancroid, particularly in at-risk populations and regions where it may be more prevalent. A comprehensive evaluation, including clinical assessment and appropriate laboratory testing to exclude other etiologies, is paramount for accurate diagnosis and effective management, ultimately improving patient outcomes and preventing further transmission. Understanding the nuances of Chancroid Differential Diagnosis is essential for all healthcare professionals involved in the care of patients with genital ulcers.

References

1.Dada AJ, Ajayi AO, Diamondstone L, Quinn TC, Blattner WA, Biggar RJ. A serosurvey of Haemophilus ducreyi, syphilis, and herpes simplex virus type 2 and their association with human immunodeficiency virus among female sex workers in Lagos, Nigeria. Sex Transm Dis. 1998 May;25(5):237-42. [PubMed: 9587174]

2.Hayes RJ, Schulz KF, Plummer FA. The cofactor effect of genital ulcers on the per-exposure risk of HIV transmission in sub-Saharan Africa. J Trop Med Hyg. 1995 Feb;98(1):1-8. [PubMed: 7861474]

3.Mohammed TT, Olumide YM. Chancroid and human immunodeficiency virus infection–a review. Int J Dermatol. 2008 Jan;47(1):1-8. [PubMed: 18173591]

4.Galvin SR, Cohen MS. The role of sexually transmitted diseases in HIV transmission. Nat Rev Microbiol. 2004 Jan;2(1):33-42. [PubMed: 15035007]

5.Al-Tawfiq JA, Harezlak J, Katz BP, Spinola SM. Cumulative experience with Haemophilus ducreyi 35000 in the human model of experimental infection. Sex Transm Dis. 2000 Feb;27(2):111-4. [PubMed: 10676978]

6.Cope LD, Lumbley S, Latimer JL, Klesney-Tait J, Stevens MK, Johnson LS, Purven M, Munson RS, Lagergard T, Radolf JD, Hansen EJ. A diffusible cytotoxin of Haemophilus ducreyi. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Apr 15;94(8):4056-61. [PMC free article: PMC20567] [PubMed: 9108104]

7.Hawkes S, West B, Wilson S, Whittle H, Mabey D. Asymptomatic carriage of Haemophilus ducreyi confirmed by the polymerase chain reaction. Genitourin Med. 1995 Aug;71(4):224-7. [PMC free article: PMC1195517] [PubMed: 7590712]

8.Alfa M. The laboratory diagnosis of Haemophilus ducreyi. Can J Infect Dis Med Microbiol. 2005 Jan;16(1):31-4. [PMC free article: PMC2095004] [PubMed: 18159525]

9.Lewis DA. Diagnostic tests for chancroid. Sex Transm Infect. 2000 Apr;76(2):137-41. [PMC free article: PMC1758295] [PubMed: 10858718]

10.Glatz M, Juricevic N, Altwegg M, Bruisten S, Komericki P, Lautenschlager S, Weber R, Bosshard PP. A multicenter prospective trial to asses a new real-time polymerase chain reaction for detection of Treponema pallidum, herpes simplex-1/2 and Haemophilus ducreyi in genital, anal and oropharyngeal ulcers. Clin Microbiol Infect. 2014 Dec;20(12):O1020-7. [PubMed: 24909546]

11.González-Beiras C, Marks M, Chen CY, Roberts S, Mitjà O. Epidemiology of Haemophilus ducreyi Infections. Emerg Infect Dis. 2016 Jan;22(1):1-8. [PMC free article: PMC4696685] [PubMed: 26694983]

12.Thornton AC, O’Mara EM, Sorensen SJ, Hiltke TJ, Fortney K, Katz B, Shoup RE, Hood AF, Spinola SM. Prevention of experimental Haemophilus ducreyi infection: a randomized, controlled clinical trial. J Infect Dis. 1998 Jun;177(6):1608-13. [PubMed: 9607840]

13.Lewis DA. Chancroid: clinical manifestations, diagnosis, and management. Sex Transm Infect. 2003 Feb;79(1):68-71. [PMC free article: PMC1744597] [PubMed: 12576620]