Principales aeroalérgenos en rinoconjuntivitis alérgica en la ciudad de Temuco, Chile / Aeroallergens causing rhinoconjunctivitis

Background: Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (ARC) has a prevalence of 30% in industrialized countries. For an accurate diagnosis and treatment, it is crucial to identify the causative aeroallergen. Aim: To evaluate aeroallergen sensitization in adults with ARC in the city of Temuco, Chile. Patients and Methods: A skin test against the main aeroallergens present in Temuco was carried out in patients aged 15 to 64 years with ARC diagnosed by medical examination and the Score For Allergic Rhinitis. Results: At least one aeroallergen sensitization was present in 234 (62.4%) out of 375 patients. Pollen-sensitized patients were positive mainly for Grasses (44.4%), Plantago (27.8%), Cynodon (26.1%), Sorrel (23.5%), Birch (14.9%), Nothofagus obliqua (13.3%) and Alder (11.1%). Dust mites were the most common non-pollinic sensitizing aeroallergens, including Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (70.1%) and Dermatophagoides farinae (62.8%). Conclusions: According to our results, skin tests in the city of Temuco should include at least dust mites, pollens of Grasses, Plantago, Cynodon, Sorrel, Birch, Nothofagus obliqua and Alder, because these allergens account for 93% of ARC cases in this city.

Rescue flap: alternativa de colgajo en cirugía de base de cráneo / Rescue flap: alternative in skull base surgery

RESUMEN Introducción: La elaboración de colgajos ha representado un cambio en reconstrucción de defectos resultantes de exéresis de tumoraciones de base de cráneo. No siempre indispensables, existen circunstancias, planificados o no, donde debemos emplearlos. Preservando los pedículos de la mucosa, damos cobertura a urgencias intraquirúrgicas, como fístula LCR no sospechada, así como reintervenciones. Objetivo: Presentar nuestra experiencia en pacientes, a quienes hemos realizado colgajo tipo rescue flap. Material y método: Se diseña este colgajo, sin comprometer su pedículo. En caso de fístula, sospecha de ésta o herniación del diafragma selar, se extiende, cubriendo el defecto. Resultados: De 34 pacientes intervenidos de patología hipofisaria endoscópicamente, en 18 diseñamos colgajo tipo rescue flap. 12 casos se elaboraron, no utilizándolos. En 4 pacientes con extenso tumores lo empleamos preventivamente. En 1 caso, de reintervención, previamente con colgajo Hadad izquierdo, realizamos colgajo de mucosa contralateral. En otro, diseñamos un rescue flap derecho, al objetivar salida de LCR, sellamos con este colgajo. No evidenciamos fístulas. Discusión: Esta técnica consiste en levantar parcialmente mucosa del potencial colgajo, preservando su pedículo, pudiendo utilizarse en casos de fístula LCR no programada, o reintervenciones. Sin realizar colgajos innecesariamente. Conclusión: La técnica rescue flap favorece un corredor quirúrgico, menos invasivo, manteniendo mucosa para eventuales reintervenciones.

ABSTRACT Introduction: The development of flaps has represented a change in reconstruction of defects resulting from excision of skull base tumors. It not always indispensable, there are circumstances, planned or not, where we must use them. Preserving the pedicles of the mucosa, we cover intraoperative emergencies, such as unsuspected CSF fistula, as well as reinterventions. Aim: We present our experience where we performed rescue flap. Material and method: This flap is designed without compromising its pedicle. In case of fistula, suspicion of this or herniation of the selar diaphragm, it extends, covering the defect. Results: Of 34 patients who underwent endoscopic surgery for pituitary pathology, in 18 we designed a rescue flap. 12 cases were made, not using them. In 4 patients with extensive tumors we used it preventively. In 1 case, of reintervention previously with left Hadad flap, we performed contralateral mucosa flap. In another, we designed a right rescue flap, when we observed LCR output, we seal with this flap. We did not show fistulas. Discussion: This technique consists in partially lifting the mucosa of the potential flap, preserving its pedicle, and may be used in cases of unscheduled CSF fistula, or reinterventions. Without flapping unnecessarily. Conclusions: The Rescue Flap technique favors a less invasive surgical corridor, maintaining mucosa for posible reinterventions.