RESUMEN
Resumen Introducción: los síndromes esclerodermiformes se definen por la presencia de esclerosis cutánea, induración y pérdida de la elasticidad de la piel. Su diagnóstico diferencial incluye casos de escleroderma localizada, dentro de los cuales se describe el liquen escleroso y atrófico que, hasta la fecha, no se ha reconocido en el escenario de síndromes cutáneos paraneoplásicos. Resultados: se presenta el caso de un paciente con adenocarcinoma de próstata avanzado, quién desarrolló lesiones compatibles con liquen escleroso y atrófico extragenital durante el curso de su enfermedad oncológica, confirmadas por histopatología. Conclusiones: Se cuestiona la naturaleza paraneoplásica de esta entidad cutánea en este contexto clínico particular
Abstract Introduction: Scleroderma syndromes are defined by the presence of skin sclerosis, induration and loss of skin elasticity. Their differential diagnosis includes cases of localized scleroderma, within which lichen sclerosus et atrophicus are described, which, to date, have not been recognized in the setting of paraneoplastic skin syndromes. Results: We present the case of a patient with advanced adenocarcinoma of the prostate, who developed cutaneous lesions compatible with extragenital lichen sclerosus et atrophicus during the course of the cancer, confirmed by histopathology. Conclusions: The paraneoplastic nature of this skin entity is questioned in this particular clinical context.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Treatment for lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) includes administering complementary oxygen. The effectiveness of oxygen therapy and of different delivery methods remains uncertain. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness and safety of oxygen therapy and oxygen delivery methods in the treatment of LRTIs and to define the indications for oxygen therapy in children with LRTIs. SEARCH METHODS: For this update, we searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and LILACS from March 2008 to October 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or non-RCTs comparing oxygen versus no oxygen therapy or different methods of oxygen delivery in children with LRTI aged from three months to 15 years. To determine the indications for oxygen therapy, we included observational studies or diagnostic test accuracy studies. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Three review authors independently scanned the search results to identify studies for inclusion. Two authors independently performed the methodological assessment and the third author resolved any disagreements. We calculated risk ratios (RRs) and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for dichotomous outcomes and adverse events (AEs). We performed fixed-effect meta-analyses for the estimation of pooled effects whenever there was no heterogeneity between included RCTs. We summarised the results reported in the included observational studies for the clinical indicators of hypoxaemia. MAIN RESULTS: In this review update, we included four studies (479 participants) assessing the efficacy of non-invasive delivery methods for the treatment of LRTI in children and 14 observational studies assessing the clinical sign indicators of hypoxaemia in children with LRTIs.Three RCTs (399 participants) compared the effectiveness of nasal prongs or nasal cannula with nasopharyngeal catheter; one non-RCT (80 participants) compared head box, face mask, nasopharyngeal catheter and nasal cannula. The nasopharyngeal catheter was the control group. Treatment failure was defined as number of children failing to achieve adequate arterial oxygen saturation. All included studies had a high risk of bias because of allocation methods and lack of blinded outcome assessment.For nasal prongs versus nasopharyngeal catheter, the pooled effect estimate for RCTs showed a worrying trend towards no difference between the groups (two RCTs; 239 participants; RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.36 to 2.38). Similar results were shown in the one non-RCT (RR 1.0, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.27). The overall quality of this evidence is very low. Nasal obstruction due to severe mucus production was different between treatment groups (three RCTs, 338 participants; RR 0.20, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.44; I(2) statistic = 0%). The quality of this evidence is low.The use of a face mask showed a statistically significant lower risk of failure to achieve arterial oxygen > 60 mmHg than the nasopharyngeal catheter (one non-RCT; 80 participants; odds ratio (OR) 0.20, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.88).The use of a head box showed a non-statistically significant trend towards a reduced risk of treatment failure compared to the nasopharyngeal catheter (one non-RCT; OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.12). The quality of this evidence is very low.To determine the presence of hypoxaemia in children presenting with LRTI, we assessed the sensitivity and specificity of nine clinical signs reported by the included observational studies and used this information to calculate likelihood ratios. The results showed that there is no single clinical sign or symptom that accurately identifies hypoxaemia. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: It appears that oxygen therapy given early in the course of pneumonia via nasal prongs at a flow rate of 1 to 2 L/min does not prevent children with severe pneumonia from developing hypoxaemia. However, the applicability of this evidence is limited as it comes from a small pilot trial.Nasal prongs and nasopharyngeal catheter are similar in effectiveness when used for children with LRTI. Nasal prongs are associated with fewer nasal obstruction problems. The use of a face mask and head box has been poorly studied and it is not superior to a nasopharyngeal catheter in terms of effectiveness or safety in children with LRTI.Studies assessing the effectiveness of oxygen therapy and oxygen delivery methods in children with different baseline risks are needed.There is no single clinical sign or symptom that accurately identifies hypoxaemia in children with LRTI. The summary of results presented here can help clinicians to identify children with more severe conditions.This review is limited by the small number of trials assessing oxygen therapy and oxygen delivery methods as part of LRTI treatment. There is insufficient evidence to determine which non-invasive delivery methods should be used in children with LRTI and low levels of oxygen in their blood.
Asunto(s)
Hipoxia/terapia , Terapia por Inhalación de Oxígeno/métodos , Infecciones del Sistema Respiratorio/terapia , Enfermedad Aguda , Adolescente , Bronquiolitis/terapia , Niño , Preescolar , Presión de las Vías Aéreas Positiva Contínua/métodos , Humanos , Hipoxia/etiología , Lactante , Máscaras , Terapia por Inhalación de Oxígeno/instrumentación , Neumonía Viral/terapia , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como AsuntoRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Usual practice in lower respiratory tract infections (LRTIs) includes administering complementary oxygen. The effectiveness of oxygen therapy and different methods of delivery is unknown. This review contributes to the rational use of oxygen in the treatment of LRTIs. OBJECTIVES: To determine in the treatment of LRTIs: the effectiveness of oxygen therapy and oxygen delivery methods; the safety of these methods; and indications for oxygen therapy. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library, 2008, issue 2); MEDLINE (January 1966 to March 2008); EMBASE (1990 to December 2007); and LILACS (January 1982 to March 2008). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oxygen versus no oxygen therapy or methods of oxygen delivery for hypoxaemic LRTIs in children (3 months to 15 years of age). To determine indications for oxygen therapy, observational studies were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We assessed 551 titles. No studies comparing oxygen versus no oxygen were found. Four RCTs comparing delivery methods and 12 observational studies assessing the accuracy of clinical signs indicating hypoxaemia were eligible. A meta-analysis of the RCTs comparing oxygen delivery methods was performed. MAIN RESULTS: Three studies assessed the effectiveness of nasal prongs (NP) versus nasopharyngeal catheters (NPC). The pooled estimate effect showed no differences (OR 0.96; 95% CI 0.48 to 1.93) in treatment failure (number of children failing to achieve adequate SaO2). One study compared the effectiveness of NP versus nasal catheter (NC). No differences were found in treatment failure (the mean number of episodes of desaturation/child: NC group 2.75, SD +/- 2.18 episodes/child; NP group 3, SD +/- 2.5 episodes/child, p = 0.64). Another study compared face mask (FM) and head box (HB) versus NPC. Use of FM showed lower risk of treatment failure (failure to achieve PaO2 > 60 mmHg) than the NPC (OR 0.20; 95% CI 0.55 to 0.88). As did the use of HB compared with NPC (OR 0.40; 95% CI 0.13 to 1.12).Studies assessing the accuracy of signs and/or symptoms indicating hypoxaemia showed that cyanosis, grunting, difficulty in feeding and mental alertness have better specificity in predicting hypoxaemia and its results were consistent among studies. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: NP and NPC seem to be similar in effectiveness and safety when used in patients with LRTI. There is no single clinical sign or symptom that accurately identifies hypoxaemia. Studies identifying the most effective and safe oxygen delivery method are needed.