Angioedema without urticaria in childhood.

BACKGROUND: There has been no separate study investigating angioedema without urticaria (Aw/oU) exclusively in children so far. The purpose of this study was to investigate the frequency, clinical presentation, etiology, management and follow-up of Aw/oU in children. METHODS: This is a prospective study that included all consecutive patients with a history of Aw/oU referred to our clinic between January 2011 and May 2012. A standard diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm was applied to all patients. RESULTS: The frequency of Aw/oU was found to be 1.6% during the study period. An etiological factor could be found in only 45 patients (49%). The causes of Aw/oU were infection (21%), allergy (14%), thyroid autoimmunity (TA)-related (8%) and nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drug hypersensitivity (6%), and idiopathic angioedema (51%). There was no hereditary type I, II or acquired type of angioedema or rare syndromes associated with Aw/oU. The median follow-up was 16 months (range: 12-30 months). Antihistamine prophylaxis was initiated at therapeutic doses in 20 patients with frequently recurrent angioedema due to idiopathic and euthyroid TA-related Aw/oU for 3 months. These patients responded to antihistamine prophylaxis for 3 months. Four patients relapsed after cessation of prophylaxis at the end of 3 months. Antihistamine prophylaxis was prolonged to 6 months in three patients and to 9 months in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: Angioedema without urticaria in children is a rare condition and no etiology can be identified in half of them. Antihistamine treatment alone is sufficient, and prognosis is good in recurrent non hereditary cases in a short-term follow-up period.

Make-up of the epinephrine autoinjector: the effect on its use by untrained users.

BACKGROUND: Part of the problems related to proper use of the epinephrine autoinjector may be related to the design of the autoinjector itself. AIM: We investigated whether minor modifications in the design of the currently available epinephrine autoinjector ease its use and abrogate common use errors. METHODS: All interns other than those who had previously worked in allergy department in a medical school were invited to the study. Two identical epinephrine autoinjector trainers (Epipen trainer(®) ) were used, one of which was modified by changing the gray safety cap to red and placing a yellow arrow pointing to the black injection tip. A written and visual instruction sheet for each trainer was provided. Participants were asked to demonstrate the use of the Epipen trainer either with the original or with the modified one. They were scored and timed for their demonstration. RESULTS: Out of the 224 interns who were invited to participate, one hundred and sixty-four interns (73.2%) participated in the study. The number of participants correctly demonstrating the use of epinephrine autoinjectors was 22.6% and 65% in unmodified and modified trainer groups, respectively (p < 0.001). The mean time to administer trainers was 26.78 ± 10.6 and 15.88 ± 2.55 s; total median scores were 3.08 ± 1.48 and 4.47 ± 0.84 in unmodified and modified groups, respectively (p < 0.001 for both). Significantly fewer participants had presumptive unintentional injection injury while using modified (5%) compared with unmodified trainer (45.2%) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Few and simple modifications in the design of epinephrine autoinjector were found effective in increasing its correct use and decreasing common use errors by untrained users. (Clinical trials identifier: NCT01217138).