RESUMO
Inpatient hospitalization of individuals with hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) has increased. Inpatient services may not be familiar enough with this disease to understand how to manage severe HS and/or HS flares. It would be beneficial to the inpatient medical community to establish consensus recommendations on holistic inpatient care of patients with HS. A survey study was developed and distributed by Wake Forest University School of Medicine (Winston-Salem, North Carolina). A total of 26 dermatologists participated in the Delphi process, and the process was conducted in 2 rounds. Participants voted on proposal statements using a 9-point scale (1=very inappropriate; 9=very appropriate). Statements were developed using current published guidelines for management of HS and supportive care guidelines for other severe inpatient dermatologic diseases. A total of 50 statements were reviewed and voted on between the 2 rounds. Consensus was determined using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. Twenty-six dermatologists completed the first-round survey, and 24 completed the second-round survey. The 40 consensus recommendations generated through these surveys can serve as a resource for providers caring for inpatients with HS.
Assuntos
Consenso , Técnica Delphi , Hidradenite Supurativa , Hospitalização , Hidradenite Supurativa/terapia , Hidradenite Supurativa/diagnóstico , Humanos , Pacientes Internados , Inquéritos e QuestionáriosRESUMO
This retrospective cohort study analyzes the presentation, diagnosis, and treatment outcomes of patients who developed drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) to tuberculosis (TB) therapy in a TB non-endemic region. Anti-TB agents represented 7.5% of all antimicrobial-induced DRESS cases, and rifampin was the most commonly implicated agent among drugs used to treat TB.
RESUMO
Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome, also known as drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms, is a severe cutaneous adverse reaction characterized by an exanthem, fever, and hematologic and visceral organ involvement. The differential diagnosis includes other cutaneous adverse reactions, infections, inflammatory and autoimmune diseases, and neoplastic disorders. Three sets of diagnostic criteria have been proposed; however, consensus is lacking. The cornerstone of management is immediate discontinuation of the suspected drug culprit. Systemic corticosteroids remain first-line therapy, but the literature on steroid-sparing agents is expanding. Longitudinal evaluation for sequelae is recommended. Adjunctive tests for risk stratification and drug culprit identification remain under investigation. Part II of this continuing medical education activity begins by exploring the differential diagnosis and diagnosis of drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome/drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms and concludes with an evidence-based overview of evaluation and treatment.
Assuntos
Síndrome de Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos , Eosinofilia , Humanos , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos/etiologia , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos/terapia , Eosinofilia/induzido quimicamente , Eosinofilia/diagnóstico , Eosinofilia/terapia , Pele , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , FebreRESUMO
Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DiHS), also known as drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), is a severe cutaneous adverse reaction (SCAR) characterized by an exanthem, fever, and hematologic and visceral organ involvement. Anticonvulsants, antibiotics, and allopurinol are the most common triggers. The pathogenesis involves a complex interplay between drugs, viruses, and the immune system primarily mediated by T-cells. DiHS/DRESS typically presents with a morbilliform eruption 2-6 weeks after drug exposure, and is associated with significant morbidity, mortality, and risk of relapse. Long-term sequelae primarily relate to organ dysfunction and autoimmune diseases. Part I of this continuing medical education activity on DiHS/DRESS provides an update on epidemiology, novel insights into pathogenesis, and a description of clinicopathological features and prognosis.
Assuntos
Síndrome de Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos , Eosinofilia , Humanos , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos/diagnóstico , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos/epidemiologia , Síndrome de Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos/etiologia , Eosinofilia/epidemiologia , Eosinofilia/induzido quimicamente , Anticonvulsivantes/efeitos adversos , Pele , PrognósticoAssuntos
Dermatologia , Médicos Hospitalares , Dermatopatias , Idoso , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Medicare , Hospitalização , Dermatopatias/terapia , Estudos RetrospectivosRESUMO
BACKGROUND: In the 2022 mpox (monkeypox) outbreak, 79,000 global cases have been reported. Yet, limited dermatologic data have been published regarding lesion morphology and progression. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to characterize skin lesion morphology, symptomatology, and outcomes of mpox infection over time. METHODS: The American Academy of Dermatology/International League of Dermatological Societies Dermatology COVID-19, Mpox, and Emerging Infections Registry captured deidentified patient cases of mpox entered by health care professionals. RESULTS: From August 4 to November 13, 2022, 101 cases from 13 countries were entered, primarily by dermatologists (92%). Thirty-nine percent had fewer than 5 lesions. In 54% of cases, skin lesions were the first sign of infection. In the first 1-5 days of infection, papules (36%), vesicles (17%), and pustules (20%) predominated. By days 6-10, pustules (36%) were most common, followed by erosions/ulcers (27%) and crusts/scabs (24%). Crusts/scabs were the predominant morphology after day 11. Ten cases of morbilliform rash were reported. Scarring occurred in 13% of the cases. LIMITATIONS: Registry-reported data cannot address incidence. There is a potential reporting bias from the predilection to report cases with greater clinical severity. DISCUSSION: These findings highlight differences in skin findings compared to historical outbreaks, notably the presence of skin lesions prior to systemic symptoms and low overall lesion counts. Scarring emerged as a major possible sequela.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Mpox , Dermatopatias , Humanos , Cicatriz , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Surtos de Doenças , Vesícula , Progressão da DoençaRESUMO
The World Health Organization declared the global monkeypox outbreak a public health emergency of international concern in July 2022. In response, the American Academy of Dermatology and International League of Dermatological Societies expanded the existing COVID-19 Dermatology Registry to become the "AAD/ILDS Dermatology COVID-19, Monkeypox, and Emerging Infections Registry." The goal of the registry is to rapidly collate cases of monkeypox and other emerging infections and enable prompt dissemination of findings to front-line healthcare workers and other members of the medical community. The registry is now accepting reports of monkeypox cases and cutaneous reactions to monkeypox/smallpox vaccines. The success of this collaborative effort will depend on active case entry by the global dermatology community.
Assuntos
COVID-19 , Dermatologia , Mpox , Estados Unidos/epidemiologia , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiologia , Sociedades Médicas , Sistema de RegistrosAssuntos
Dermatologia , Infestações por Piolhos , Pediculus , Animais , Hemoglobinas , Humanos , Infestações por Piolhos/diagnósticoRESUMO
Importance: Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP) is a rare, severe cutaneous adverse reaction associated with systemic complications. Currently available data are largely limited to small retrospective case series. Objective: To describe the clinical characteristics, disease course, and outcomes of a heterogeneous group of patients with AGEP across the US. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective review of a case series of patients was conducted from January 1, 2000, through July 31, 2020. All 340 included cases throughout 10 academic health systems in the US were scored retrospectively using the EuroSCAR scoring system, and patients with a score corresponding to probable or definite AGEP and aged 18 years or older were included. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient demographic characteristics, clinical course, suspected causative agent, treatment, and short- and long-term outcomes. Results: Most of the 340 included patients were women (214 [62.9%]), White (206 [60.6%]), and non-Hispanic (239 [70.3%]); mean (SD) age was 57.8 (17.4) years. A total of 154 of 310 patients (49.7%) had a temperature greater than or equal to 38.0 °C that lasted for a median of 2 (IQR, 1-4) days. Of 309 patients, 263 (85.1%) developed absolute neutrophilia and 161 patients (52.1%) developed either absolute or relative eosinophilia. Suspected causes of AGEP were medications (291 [85.6%]), intravenous contrast agents (7 [2.1%]), infection (3 [0.9%]), or unknown (39 [11.5%]). In 151 cases in which a single medication was identified, 63 (41.7%) were ß-lactam antimicrobials, 51 (33.8%) were non-ß-lactam antimicrobials, 9 (6.0%) were anticonvulsants, and 5 (3.3%) were calcium channel blockers. The median time from medication initiation to AGEP start date was 3 (IQR, 1-9) days. Twenty-five of 298 patients (8.4%) had an acute elevation of aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase levels, with a peak at 6 (IQR, 3-9) days. Twenty-five of 319 patients (7.8%) experienced acute kidney insufficiency, with the median time to peak creatinine level being 4 (IQR, 2-5) days after the AGEP start date. Treatments included topical corticosteroids (277 [81.5%], either alone or in combination), systemic corticosteroids (109 [32.1%]), cyclosporine (10 [2.9%]), or supportive care only (36 [10.6%]). All-cause mortality within 30 days was 3.5% (n = 12), none of which was suspected to be due to AGEP. Conclusions and Relevance: This retrospective case series evaluation of 340 patients, the largest known study cohort to date, suggests that AGEP onset is acute, is usually triggered by recent exposure to an antimicrobial, may be associated with liver or kidney complications in a minority of patients, and that discontinuation of the triggering treatment may lead to improvement or resolution.
Assuntos
Pustulose Exantematosa Aguda Generalizada , Pustulose Exantematosa Aguda Generalizada/diagnóstico , Pustulose Exantematosa Aguda Generalizada/etiologia , Adolescente , Antibacterianos/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Glucocorticoides , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , PeleAssuntos
Assistência ao Convalescente , Dermatologia , Seguimentos , Humanos , Alta do Paciente , PacientesRESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cutaneous reactions after COVID-19 vaccination have been commonly reported; however, histopathologic features and clinical correlations have not been well characterized. METHODS: We evaluated for a history of skin biopsy all reports of reactions associated with COVID-19 vaccination identified in an international registry. When histopathology reports were available, we categorized them by reaction patterns. RESULTS: Of 803 vaccine reactions reported, 58 (7%) cases had biopsy reports available for review. The most common histopathologic reaction pattern was spongiotic dermatitis, which clinically ranged from robust papules with overlying crust, to pityriasis rosea-like eruptions, to pink papules with fine scale. We propose the acronym "V-REPP" (vaccine-related eruption of papules and plaques) for this spectrum. Other clinical patterns included bullous pemphigoid-like (n = 12), dermal hypersensitivity (n = 4), herpes zoster (n = 4), lichen planus-like (n = 4), pernio (n = 3), urticarial (n = 2), neutrophilic dermatosis (n = 2), leukocytoclastic vasculitis (n = 2), morbilliform (n = 2), delayed large local reactions (n = 2), erythromelalgia (n = 1), and other (n = 5). LIMITATIONS: Cases in which histopathology was available represented a minority of registry entries. Analysis of registry data cannot measure incidence. CONCLUSION: Clinical and histopathologic correlation allowed for categorization of cutaneous reactions to the COVID-19 vaccine. We propose defining a subset of vaccine-related eruption of papules and plaques, as well as 12 other patterns, following COVID-19 vaccination.
Assuntos
Vacinas contra COVID-19/efeitos adversos , COVID-19 , Exantema , Dermatopatias/induzido quimicamente , COVID-19/prevenção & controle , Exantema/induzido quimicamente , Humanos , Sistema de RegistrosRESUMO
Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), an emergent disease caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), has rapidly spread throughout the globe since its discovery in December 2019. Although first appreciated to cause pneumonia, numerous organ systems are now known to be involved. The objective of this article is to review the broad spectrum of cutaneous manifestations reported in association with SARS-CoV-2 infection. The most commonly reported cutaneous manifestations associated with COVID-19 infection include pernio (chilblain)-like acral lesions, morbilliform (exanthematous) rash, urticaria, vesicular (varicella-like) eruptions, and vaso-occlusive lesions (livedo racemosa, retiform purpura). It is important to consider SARS-CoV-2 infection in the differential diagnosis of a patient presenting with these lesions in the appropriate clinical context, as cutaneous manifestations may be present in otherwise asymptomatic individuals, or present before developing other symptoms of infection. With increased access to diagnostic testing, we are beginning to understand the utility and limitations of currently available assays.