Degos disease: a new simulator of non-accidental injury.

Recent high-profile cases have made paediatricians very aware of the serious implications of either missing or wrongly diagnosing non-accidental injury. Subdural fluid collections in non-mobile infants usually represent haemorrhage caused by non-accidental injury. We report a 6-month-old male who presented to the Accident and Emergency Department of Birmingham Heartlands Hospital with bilateral subdural fluid collections and skin ulcers resembling cigarette burns. Non-accidental injury was considered to be the most likely diagnosis. However, while under observation in hospital, the child's neurological condition deteriorated with progressive cerebral infarctions, and serial photographs of the skin lesions showed failure to heal. The revised diagnosis, confirmed histologically, was Degos disease, an extremely rare and often fatal occlusive vasculopathy. The child was treated palliatively and died 8 weeks after presentation. This report informs doctors of a new simulator of non-accidental injury to be considered in infants with otherwise unexplained subdural fluid collections.

Predicting complications with pretreatment testing in infantile haemangioma treated with oral propranolol.

BACKGROUND: Since 2008, orally administered propranolol has rapidly gained acceptance as the preferred therapy for haemangiomas, and is usually initiated by ophthalmologists, dermatologists or plastic surgeons who do not routinely use propranolol for any other indication. During the initial years when experience was limited, most healthcare professionals justifiably adopted a cautious approach when initiating and monitoring treatment. A consensus recommendation from the American Society of Dermatologists suggests routine observation, monitoring and cardiology assessments prior to propranolol initiation. AIM: This study aims to analyse treatment initiation in a large tertiary children's hospital and investigate the value of pretreatment testing in predicting commonly seen adverse reactions of propranolol. METHOD: 104 eligible patients treated between January 2009 and July 2012 were included. All patients underwent pretesting either with protocol A (administration of test dose with routine observations) or protocol B (cardiology clinic assessment, including two-dimensional echocardiography without test dose). RESULTS: 38.5% (40/104) of patients developed adverse reactions during treatment; however, there were no severe or life-threatening reactions. Protocol A has a sensitivity of 0 (95% CI 0 to 0.17) and specificity of 0.95 (95% CI 0.83 to 0.99). Protocol B has a sensitivity of 0.07 (95% CI 0 to 0.34) and specificity of 0.86 (95% CI 0.63 to 0.96). CONCLUSIONS: The predictive values of both protocols for the commonly observed adverse reactions are low. In this series, there is no evidence to suggest that routine pretreatment testing before propranolol initiation is of any value in otherwise healthy children.