ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Iodinated contrast media produce non-immediate hypersensitivity reactions (NIHR). The goal of this prospective study was to determine the utility of skin tests and the subsequent tolerance to negative skin-tested iodinated contrasts in patients with NIHR caused by iomeprol. METHODS: Prick and intradermal tests with iomeprol, iopamidol, iopromide, and iobitridol were performed in all patients. IV challenge with the causative contrast (iomeprol in 90%) was made if skin tests were negative. In case of a positive skin test with the causal contrast, or a positive challenge test with it, IV challenge test with an alternative, negative skin-tested contrast was performed in all patients. RESULTS: Skin tests were positive in 47.6% (20/42) of patients with NIHR induced by iomeprol. Of the 66 challenge tests performed with negative skin-tested iodinated contrasts, tolerance was confirmed in 35 (53%): 32 iomeron, 2 iobitridol, 1 iopamidol. Cross-reactivity between iomeprol and iopamidol was 22% (4/20 in patients with positive skin tests and 5/21 in patients with negative skin tests). CONCLUSIONS: Sensitivity of the skin tests was less than 50% NIHRs due to iomeprol, while the negative predictive value of skin tests in patients who tolerated challenges with alternative contrasts (mainly iopamidol) was 53% (35 tolerated out of 66 performed). The cross-reactivity between iomeprol and iopamidol is high.
Subject(s)
Hypersensitivity, Immediate , Iodine Compounds , Humans , Iopamidol/adverse effects , Contrast Media/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , Skin Tests , Iodine Compounds/adverse effects , Hypersensitivity, Immediate/diagnosis , Hypersensitivity, Immediate/etiologySubject(s)
Acrylates/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Gels/adverse effects , Ultrasonography , Urea/analogs & derivatives , Acrylates/analysis , Adult , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Emulsifying Agents/adverse effects , Emulsifying Agents/analysis , Female , Gels/chemistry , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patch Tests , Preservatives, Pharmaceutical/adverse effects , Preservatives, Pharmaceutical/analysis , Urea/adverse effects , Urea/analysisABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Fixed drug eruption (FDE) is a characteristic form of intraepidermal CD8+ T cell-mediated drug reaction, with repeated appearance of isolated or multiple skin lesions in the same location after receiving the offending drug. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) are the most common cause. Selective inhibitors of inducible cyclooxygenase 2 (COX-2) provoke a lesser degree of allergic or idiosyncratic adverse reactions than conventional NSAID, but they can cause skin reactions of variable severity. OBJECTIVE: Etoricoxib has been related to a variety of unusual skin reactions, including several reports of FDE. METHODS: We perfomed epicutaneous test to diagnose patients with suspected etoricoxib fixe drug rash due to clinical features and reproducibility on at least two occasions. RESULTS: We present seven new cases of etoricoxib-induced fixed drug eruption, with a diagnosis based on clinical presentation. This diagnosis was confirmed by an etoricoxib-positive lesional patch test in six cases and by a positive low-dose oral challenge in the other one. Two patients showed negative patch tests with celecoxib (10% in pet.) on the residual lesions, and oral tolerance was confirmed in one. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, this is the largest series on FDE induced by etoricoxib reported to date.
Subject(s)
Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal/adverse effects , Cyclooxygenase 2 Inhibitors/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/etiology , Drug Eruptions/etiology , Etoricoxib/adverse effects , Adult , Aged , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/diagnosis , Drug Eruptions/diagnosis , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Patch TestsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: COVID-19 cutaneous manifestations have been recently described and classified in five different clinical patterns, including acral erythema-edema (pseudo-chilblain), maculopapular exanthemas, vesicular eruptions, urticarial lesions, and livedo or necrosis. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to examine the skin of hospitalized patients with a confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 disease and describe the real prevalence of skin manifestations. METHODS: A cross-sectional study, which included hospitalized patients in Cruces University Hospital from April 14-30, 2020, with a laboratory-confirmed diagnosis of COVID-19 (with polymerase chain reaction and/or serology tests), was conducted. Entire body surface examination was performed by experienced dermatologists to search for cutaneous manifestations related to COVID-19 disease. RESULTS: From a sample of 75 patients, 14 (18.7%) developed cutaneous manifestations possibly related to COVID-19. We found six patients with acral erythema-edema (pseudo-chilblain) (42.8%), four patients with maculopapular exanthemas (28.6%), two patients with urticarial lesions (14.3%), one patient with livedo reticularis-like lesions (7.15%), and one patient with vesicular eruption (7.15%). CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides a more plausible relationship between the main cutaneous patterns and COVID-19 in hospitalized patients as all of them had a confirmatory laboratory test. Skin manifestations are frequent but mild with spontaneous resolution. These findings are nonspecific and can be similar to other viral infections and adverse drug reactions in hospitalized patients.
