ABSTRACT
No disponible
Subject(s)
Humans , Larva/pathogenicity , Hypersensitivity/etiology , Immunoblotting/methods , Allergens/isolation & purification , Allergens , Skin Tests/methodsABSTRACT
No disponible
Subject(s)
Adult , Aged , Female , Male , Humans , Angioedema/drug therapy , Melkersson-Rosenthal Syndrome/diagnosis , Methylprednisolone/therapeutic use , Pheniramine/therapeutic use , Diagnosis, Differential , Minocycline/therapeutic use , Skin TestsABSTRACT
OBJECTIVES: Epidemiologic and auxologic characteristics of patients treated with GH during childhood and adolescence and entered in a national registry in Catalonia were studied between 1988 and 1997. At the end of 1997, prevalence was 53.2 treatments/100,000 inhabitants aged 0-14 years. Maximum annual incidence rates were observed in 1990 and 1991 (34.0-35.6 cases/100,000 inhabitants aged 0-14 years). STUDY DESIGN: Analysis of treatments terminated in 1993 (n = 548) revealed, for the three principal reasons for cessation of treatment ('near-final height', 'adequate height but further growth potential', and 'poor growth response'), that males began and ended treatment at older ages with a better auxologic situation in SDS than girls at the beginning and end of therapy in the first two subgroups, with a similar duration of therapy. Severe GH deficiency (GHD) [both multiple pituitary hormone deficiency (MPHD) and the most severe isolated GHD (IGHD-A)] was more frequent in the group ending treatment at 'near-final height', whereas cessation of therapy because of 'poor growth response' was more frequent in the group with 'other causes of short stature' and no demonstrable GHD by routine tests. In the near-final height group, after excluding Turner's syndrome, MPHD and GHD cases secondary to brain tumors and GH deficiencies associated with malformative syndromes, positive linear correlations were observed between HSDS at the end of treatment and HSDS at the beginning, predicted adult height SDS (PAHSDS) and target height SDS (THSDS). Multiple regression analysis showed that in this group of patients, 41.4% of the variability in HSDS increment can be explained by the equation: HSDS increment = -0.33 + 0.29 THSDS - 0.68 HSDS at the beginning of treatment. RESULTS: The outcome showed a reasonable use of GH, since good-response cases generally continued treatment until final height whereas therapy was suspended in doubtful cases.
Subject(s)
Body Height , Growth Disorders/drug therapy , Human Growth Hormone/therapeutic use , Adolescent , Child , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Growth Disorders/classification , Growth Disorders/epidemiology , Human Growth Hormone/deficiency , Human Growth Hormone/metabolism , Humans , Male , Regression Analysis , Retrospective Studies , Time Factors , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
Fundamento: El propóleos es una causa reconocida de dermatitis de contacto ocupacional en apicultores. Si bien se han descrito reacciones de hipersensibilidad retardada al propóleos, no se ha presentado aún en la literatura ningún caso de hipersensibilidad inmediata. Se presentan dos casos de alergia al propóleos: en el primer caso, se demostró la existencia de un mecanismo de hipersensibilidad retardada; en el segundo caso, se comnprobó la existencia de una respuesta mediada por IgE. Métodos: La existencia de hipersensibilidad retardada al propóleos se investigó mediante la realización de pruebas epicutáneas; la hipersensibilidad inmediata se demostró por prick by prick, así como mediante detección de IgE específica por RAST. Resultados: En el primer paciente, los test epicutáneos fueron positivos para el propóleos. En el segundo paciente, se demostró la existencia de una repuesta mediada por IgE, tanto por prick by prick como por RAST. No se observó respuesta tardía ni inmediata al propóleos en ninguno de los seis pacientes utilizados como control. Conclusiones: Se presenta el primer caso de hipersensibilidad inmediata al propóleos. Esta sustancia resinosa debe ser tenida en cuenta por los apicultores, además de por su capacidad para ocasionar dermatitis de contacto, por su potencial para originar reacciones de tipo inmediato. (AU)
Subject(s)
Male , Middle Aged , Child , Humans , Propolis/adverse effects , Dermatitis, Allergic Contact/immunology , Hypersensitivity, Immediate/immunology , Allergens , Bee Venoms/adverse effects , Skin Tests/methodsSubject(s)
Alkalosis/etiology , Giant Cell Arteritis/complications , Hypokalemia/etiology , Aged , Alkalosis/pathology , Anti-Inflammatory Agents/therapeutic use , Giant Cell Arteritis/diagnostic imaging , Giant Cell Arteritis/pathology , Humans , Hyperaldosteronism/complications , Hypokalemia/pathology , Kidney/diagnostic imaging , Kidney/pathology , Magnetic Resonance Imaging , Male , Prednisolone/therapeutic use , UltrasonographyABSTRACT
37 evaluable patients with relapsed head and neck cancer received as treatment Cisplatin alone (18 patients) or Cisplatin + Adriamycin (19 patients). Both regimens consisted of three-weeks-interval courses. Cisplatin was administered at a dose of 100 mg/m2 as an i.v. infusion with prehydration, posthydration, mannitol and furosemide. Cisplatin + Adriamycin combination was administered at doses of 50 mg/m2 Cisplatin and 50 mg/m2 Adriamycin, both drugs the same day. Clinical toxicity was mild with both regimens. Overall hematologic toxicity was moderate but it was severe with regard to red cells. Some cases of renal toxicity were observed with Cisplatin regimen while no case was noticed with Cisplatin + Adriamycin combination. An overall response rate of 44% (4 CR + 4 PR) was achieved with Cisplatin protocol. The mean duration of response was 5,5 months. An overall response rate of 53% (3 CR + 7 PR) was achieved with Cisplatin + Adriamycin protocol. The mean duration of response was 2,75 months.
