Donovanosis

Donovanosis is a bacterial disease, with the causative organism described in the sources as a gram-negative bacillus, Calymmatobacterium granulomatis ^[1]. The literature also notes an unresolved taxonomic debate, including a proposal to reclassify the organism as Klebsiella granulomatis, but no definitive consensus is stated in the provided material ^[1][2]. In the source set, the condition is framed primarily as a chronic genital ulcerative infection ^[2][3].

The condition usually presents with genital ulcers that have a distinct clinical appearance ^[1]. It is described as a chronic cause of genital ulceration and as a progressive infection ^[2][1]. The sources do not provide detailed information on systemic manifestations, timing, or complication patterns, and source-backed detail on those points is not yet available. The published material also warns that sensational descriptions such as a “flesh-eating infection” are false and contribute to stigma rather than clinical clarity ^[1].

Donovanosis has been a problem in many developing countries, but the sources state that prevalence has declined significantly in recent years and that the disease is well on the way to eradication ^[1]. One abstract reports a significant epidemic in Durban from 1988 to 1997, while noting that the current status of that epidemic is unclear ^[2]. The disease is underdiagnosed both in endemic areas and in countries where clinicians have limited experience with tropical diseases ^[3]. The available sources also describe an elimination programme among Aboriginals in Australia as apparently successful, though the underlying program details are not provided here ^[2].

The provided sources do not specify a transmission route in explicit mechanistic terms, and source-backed detail on the exact mode of spread is not yet available. They do state that donovanosis is frequently associated with sexually transmitted infections, which supports a sexually linked exposure context ^[3]. The disease is therefore best read in surveillance as a genital-ulcerative infection with STI association rather than as a condition whose route is fully characterized in the supplied excerpts ^[3][1].

The sources do not define formal risk groups with precision, and source-backed detail on age, sex, or other demographic vulnerabilities is not yet available. What is supported is that the condition is often discussed in relation to sexually transmitted infections and is reported more often in endemic settings or where clinicians have limited experience with tropical disease ^[3]. Surveillance descriptions should therefore pay particular attention to populations in endemic areas and to patients presenting with genital ulceration ^[1][3].

The sources do not provide a detailed prevention schedule or specific exposure-control package, and source-backed detail on those measures is not yet available. They do indicate that local syndromic management protocols for genital ulceration may need to be adapted in endemic areas, and that an elimination programme among Aboriginals in Australia was successful enough to be cited as a model ^[2]. The literature also emphasizes that false social-media narratives can increase stigma, implying a need for careful risk communication ^[1].

In surveillance, donovanosis should be interpreted as a chronic, generally uncommon genital-ulcer disease with declining reported prevalence but persistent underdiagnosis in endemic and low-experience settings ^[1][3]. The available literature highlights that standard syndromic STI approaches and prior antibiotic exposure may reduce the yield of confirmatory microscopy or histopathology, which complicates case ascertainment ^[3]. As a result, trend data may reflect both true decline and diagnostic limitations, and historical outbreaks or local elimination programmes should be considered when interpreting case counts ^[2][3].

1. 1 O'Farrell N et al. Donovanosis. Clin Dermatol. 2026 Jan-Feb. PMID: 41016613. doi: 10.1016/j.clindermatol.2025.09.007. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/41016613/
2. 2 O'Farrell N et al. Donovanosis. Sex Transm Infect. 2002 Dec. PMID: 12473810. doi: 10.1136/sti.78.6.452. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12473810/
3. 3 Velho PE et al. Donovanosis. Braz J Infect Dis. 2008 Dec. PMID: 19287842. doi: 10.1590/s1413-86702008000600015. PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19287842/
4. 4 Donovanosis. Diagnostics to Pathogenomics of Sexually Transmitted Infections. 2018. doi: 10.1002/9781119380924.ch9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119380924.ch9
5. 5 Donovanosis. Key Topics in Sexual Health. None. doi: 10.4324/9780203414675_donovanosis. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203414675_donovanosis
6. 6 Donovanosis. Journal of Medical Microbiology. 1999. doi: 10.1099/00222615-48-8-707. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1099/00222615-48-8-707

ICD-10

ICD-11

Total cases

114

Peak month

2000-01

Coverage

1 reporting countries · 2000-01-01 → 2026-06-01