ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Injecting dermal fillers in patients with autoimmune inflammatory rheumatic diseases (AIIRDs) is controversial. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the attitudes of patients with AIIRDs regarding the use of dermal fillers and the side effects of those who underwent them. METHODS: Patients with AIIRDs who attended a rheumatology outpatient clinic between 2016 and 2018 filled in a questionnaire about their attitudes toward dermal filler injections. The questionnaire evaluated information received from professionals and the factors that influenced their decision of whether or not to undergo the procedures. RESULTS: Overall, 194 patients with AIIRDs (mean age 56.5 ± 14.0, 99% women) responded. Forty-two of them had previously undergone the injections and intended to repeat them (Group A), 37 had not received filler injections but intended to do so (Group B), and 114 who had never undergone them did not intend to undergo them. The major motivation for undergoing filler injections was social. Patients treated with dermal fillers refrained from informing their rheumatologist about their injections. They were, however, highly satisfied with the procedure and reported negligible side effects. CONCLUSION: The use of dermal fillers was apparently safe and well received by patients with AIIRDs. Physicians' recommendations to refrain from injecting them with dermal fillers should be reconsidered and evaluated in clinical studies.
Subject(s)
Autoimmune Diseases/complications , Cosmetic Techniques/psychology , Dermal Fillers/administration & dosage , Rheumatic Diseases/complications , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Autoimmune Diseases/immunology , Cosmetic Techniques/adverse effects , Cosmetic Techniques/statistics & numerical data , Dermal Fillers/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Intention , Male , Middle Aged , Rheumatic Diseases/immunology , Surveys and Questionnaires/statistics & numerical data , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: To report 4 cases of propythiouracil (PTU)-induced lupus or vasculitis and to review the literature on that subject. METHODS: We describe the clinical presentation, course, and outcome of 4 patients and review the medical literature registered in the Medline PubMed database from 1966 to 2004 by using the keywords: Graves, thyrotoxicosis, propylthiouracil, lupus, vasculitis, arthritis, rash, ANA, and ANCA. Cases were classified into drug-induced lupus (DIL) or vasculitis using accepted definitions and evaluated with emphasis on gender, age, origin, duration of treatment, delay in diagnosis, clinical and serological features, and outcome. RESULTS: We described our 4 patients and analyzed 42 well-documented cases of DIL- and PTU-induced vasculitis (30 had vasculitis and 12 fulfilled the classification criteria of DIL). Patients with vasculitis were significantly older (mean 43 versus 22 years) and had a longer duration of treatment in comparison with DIL (35 versus 24 weeks). Musculoskeletal symptoms were prominent in DIL, while renal and pulmonary involvement was found in a significantly higher proportion of PTU-induced vasculitis. ANA, anti-DNA, and anti-histone were predominantly found in DIL, while p-ANCA was found in a similar proportion of patients in both groups. c-ANCA was detected only in patients with vasculitis. All patients with DIL completely recovered (most after stopping PTU), while about 50% of PTU-induced vasculitis needed steroids or immunosuppressive drugs, including cyclophosphamide and plasmapheresis. CONCLUSIONS: Most of the cases of PTU-induced autoimmune phenomena are due to vasculitis. Despite the common presence of p-ANCA in both DIL- and PTU-induced vasculitis, substantial differences in demographic, clinical, and outcome features of these entities allow an accurate diagnosis and consequent management.
