RESUMO
Necrotizing pneumonias occur infrequently in children but may be associated with significant morbidity. If not adequately treated, necrotizing pneumonia may lead to complications including bronchopleural fistula, empyema, respiratory failure, and septic shock. Staphylococcus aureus is the most commonly implicated agent, followed by Streptococcus pneumoniae. Antimicrobial treatment is the cornerstone of management, although surgical drainage may be required in some cases. We present the case of a 14-month-old child with fever and cough that persisted despite treatment with typical first-line oral antimicrobial therapy. An initial plain radiograph of the chest demonstrated lobar pneumonia. Ultimately, computed tomography of the chest revealed a cavitary lesion in the left upper lobe of the lung. We review the literature and describe the clinical presentation, diagnosis, microbiological etiology, and management of necrotizing pneumonia in children.
Assuntos
Antibacterianos/uso terapêutico , Pulmão/patologia , Pneumonia Necrosante/diagnóstico , Feminino , Humanos , Lactente , Pneumonia Necrosante/tratamento farmacológico , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios XRESUMO
Abdominal cerebrospinal fluid pseudocyst is an uncommon complication of ventriculoperitoneal shunt and is seen more commonly in the pediatric population. The diagnosis of an abdominal cerebrospinal fluid pseudocyst is typically made by ultrasonography, which demonstrates a simple or loculated fluid collection in the abdomen. We present a case of abdominal pseudocyst diagnosed by point-of-care ultrasound.
Assuntos
Dor Abdominal/diagnóstico por imagem , Dor Abdominal/etiologia , Cistos/líquido cefalorraquidiano , Cistos/diagnóstico por imagem , Sistemas Automatizados de Assistência Junto ao Leito , Ultrassonografia/métodos , Derivação Ventriculoperitoneal/efeitos adversos , Dor Abdominal/terapia , Cistos/terapia , Diagnóstico Diferencial , Humanos , Lactente , MasculinoRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to compare anxiolysis with intranasal dexmedetomidine, an alpha-2 agonist, versus intranasal midazolam for pediatric laceration repairs. METHODS: We performed a double-blind, randomized controlled trial of 40 patients 1-5 years with lacerations requiring suture repair in an academic pediatric emergency department (ED). Patients were randomized to receive either intranasal dexmedetomidine or intranasal midazolam. Our primary outcome measure was the anxiety score at the time of patient positioning for the laceration repair. We chose this time point to isolate the anxiolysis from the medications prior to intervention. Patient encounters were videotaped and scored for anxiety at multiple time points using the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale. The scale is 23.3-100 with higher scores indicating higher anxiety. We also evaluated these scores as a secondary outcome by dichotomizing them into anxious versus not anxious with a previously validated score cutoff. RESULTS: Of the 40 patients enrolled, 20 in the dexmedetomidine group and 18 in the midazolam group completed the study and were included in the analysis. The median age was 3.3 years (range = 1.0-5.4 years). The median baseline anxiety score was 48.3. The anxiety score at position for procedure for patients receiving dexmedetomidine was 9.2 points lower than those receiving midazolam (median difference = 9.2, 95% confidence interval = 5 to 13.3; median score for dexmedetomidine = 23.3, median score for midazolam = 36.3). The proportion of patients who were classified as not anxious at the position for procedure was significantly higher in the dexmedetomidine group (70%) versus the midazolam group (11%). The number needed to treat with dexmedetomidine instead of midazolam to obtain the result of a not anxious patient at this time point was 1.7 patients. There were also significantly more patients who were classified as not anxious at the time of wound washout in the dexmedetomidine group compared to the midazolam group (35% vs. 6%). Dexmedetomidine and midazolam performed similarly with respect to all other measures including anxiety at other time points, parental perceived anxiety, parent and proceduralist satisfaction, procedural success, complications, and time in the ED. There were no serious adverse events seen in either group. CONCLUSIONS: Intranasal dexmedetomidine is an alternative anxiolytic medication to intranasal midazolam for pediatric laceration repairs, performing similarly in our study, except that patients who received dexmedetomidine had less anxiety at the time of positioning for procedure.