RESUMO
El cianocrilato es un compuesto adhesivo que se utiliza en la fabricación de superpegamentos. En contacto con tejidos de algodón o lana puede producir quemaduras térmicas. Por el contrario, en contacto sobre piel sana se han descrito dermatitis de contacto o alérgica pero no quemaduras. Caso clínico. Niña de 8 años que acude a urgencias tras haber derramado de manera accidental un superpegamento directamente sobre una mano y ambas extremidades inferiores, permaneciendo con el pegamento en contacto con la piel durante 3 horas sin poder retirarlo en domicilio. En la exploración destacaba gran eritema en varias regiones subyacentes al pegamento, sin ampollas, heridas ni sangrado. El pegamento se retiró bajo sedoanalgesia con lavavajillas líquido diluido en agua tibia, sin apreciarse solución de continuidad ni quemadura. Conclusiones. Existen numerosas medidas para la retirada de adhesivos de la piel. Escoger la opción terapéutica viene determinado, entre otros factores, por la presencia de lesiones cutáneas bajo el adhesivo. La aplicación de acetona está contraindicada en pieles con lesiones debido a que puede empeorar la irritación de las mismas. La demora hasta la retirada del adhesivo puede influir en el éxito del tratamiento; así como en la aparición de posibles secuelas (AU)
Cyanoacrylate is an adhesive used as a component in most of super glues. It can cause thermal burns if in contact with wool or cotton fabric. Nevertheless, in contact with intact skin it can cause contact or allergic dermatitis, but no thermal burns have been described.Clinical case: 8-year-old girl who had suffered an accidental fall of one of these glues directly on one of her hands and both lower extremities, and who had remained with the glue in contact with the skin for 3 hours. On examination we observed erythema on several regions underlying the glue, without blisters, wounds or bleeding. The glue was removed with warm water and detergent. No open wounds or burns were noticed.Conclusions: There are different ways to remove adhesives from the skin. Choosing the correct therapeutic option is determined, among other factors, by the presence of skin lesions under the adhesive. The use of acetone is contraindicated in injured skin because it can worsen the irritation. The delay in the removal of the adhesive can influence the success of the treatment and the type of treatment to be applied. (AU)
Assuntos
Humanos , Feminino , Criança , Cianoacrilatos/efeitos adversos , Dermatite de Contato/etiologiaRESUMO
El síndrome de Loeffler consiste en una neumonía eosinofílica aguda consecuencia de una reacción inmunológica de tipo alérgico, principalmente secundario a la fase pulmonar de los ciclos de algunos parásitos. Los parásitos más frecuentemente asociados son los nemátodos, y, entre ellos, Ascaris lumbricoides que es el principal causante de Síndrome de Loeffler. Clínicamente puede cursar con tos, dificultad respiratoria de distinto grado, sibilancias y subcrepitantes en la auscultación y fiebre. Como hallazgos radiológicos suelen apreciarse infiltrados intersticiales y en los exámenes de laboratorio destaca la presencia de eosinofilia en el hemograma. Se trata de un síndrome con muy baja incidencia a nivel global, probablemente debido a su infradiagnóstico, por lo que presentamos el caso de un paciente de 14 años con diagnóstico de Síndrome de Loeffler asociado a Ascaris lumbricoides y a Strongyloides stercolaris. (provisto por Infomedic International)
Loeffler's syndrome consist of an acute eosinophilic pneumonia due to an immunnologic reaction, mainly owing to the pulmonary phase of the life's cycles of some parasites. Nematodes are the most common parasites related to the syndrome, and between them, Ascaris lumbricoides is the one that causes most of the Loeffler's Syndrome. Symptoms that can be caused by the syndrome are cough, breath difficulties of different grades, fever and wheezing and crackling on auscultation. Radiological findings are bilateral interstitial infiltrates and in laboratory test eosinophilia stands out in blood count. The global incidence of the syndrome is very low, maybe due to an underdiagnosis, so we present the case of a 14-year-old male child with Loeffler´s Syndrome caused by Ascaris lumbricoides and Strongyloides stercolaris. (provided by Infomedic International)
RESUMO
Most publications on pediatric COVID-19 in Spain were performed at the beginning of the pandemic when some diagnostic tools were not widely available. This study aims to show the real spectrum of the infection based on wide detection of cases due to symptoms and contact tracing. A descriptive and analytical observational study was performed including pediatric cases (0 to 14 years) from the region of Aragón between May 12 and October 31, 2020. Diagnostics was by PCR detection of viral RNA, rapid antigen detection test, or positive IgG serology. There were 5933 positive children included. Of them, 49.03% were women. The mean age was 7.53 ± 4.28 years. The source of infection could not be determined in 17.8% of cases. As for the rest, was determined to be within the family environment in 67.8%. The percentage of asymptomatic patients was 50.3%. Among symptomatic patients, fever (58.1%) and cough (46.7%) were the most frequent symptoms. Hospitalization was required in 0.52% of infected, intensive care unit admission was on 0.05%, and there was one death (0.02%). Children under the age of one presented some symptoms more frequently (71.6% vs 48.5%; OR 2.68; 95% CI 2.08 to 3.45; p < 0.001) and required more hospitalizations (3.9% vs 0.34%; OR 11.52; 95% CI 5.65 to 23.52; p < 0.001).Conclusion: In our environment, SARS-CoV-2 infection is like other mild respiratory viral infections in the population under the age of 15. The contagion occurs mainly in the family environment, the number of asymptomatic is high, being the symptoms mild and the complications very infrequent. What is Known: ⢠Pediatric infection produced by SARS-CoV-2 has manifested as a mild disease in relation to adult age, although with higher affectation at the youngest ages. ⢠Nearly all studies on epidemiology and clinical spectrum of the disease were conducted with patients diagnosed at the beginning of the pandemic. By then, diagnostic tools were only available in hospitals and in emergency units. What is New: ⢠Once diagnostic means were available in primary care medicine and were used not only for the diagnosis of clinical symptoms of the patient, but for the tracing of case contacts, a much more precise approach to the epidemiology and clinical manifestations of the disease was allowed, as described in this study.
