COmparisoN of TastES of Available NutriTional integrated or non-integrated formulas for infants older than 1 year of age with cow's milk allergy: A multicenter, prospective, single blind, cross-sectional observational clinical study (CONTEST Study).

Palatability of the infant formulas lacking cow milk protein formulas is reported by parents to be an important drawback. The purpose of this study is to examine decisions made by mothers of infants having cow milk protein allergy, and physicians concerning the palatability of unflavored extensively hydrolyzed formulas and amino acid-based formulas. We conducted a multi-center, randomized, single-blinded, observational taste study involving 149 pediatricians from gastroenterology and allergy subspecialties at 14 tertiary healthcare units from different regions of Turkey and involving 94 mothers of infants with cow milk protein allergy. Blinding was performed for seven formulas available in the market, which were the most commonly prescribed for feeding: four AAFs (Neocate-Numil®, Aptamil Pregomin AS-Numil®, Alfamino-Nestle®, Comidagen-Mamma®), one AAF specifically designed to address the growing nutritional and lifestyle needs of children >1 year (Neocate Junior-Numil®), 2 eHFs (Bebelac Pepti Junior-Numil®, Similac Alimentum-Abott®). Considering all three formula characteristics, Neocate junior-Numil® ranked as the number 1 product among seven products by mothers (63.8%) and physicians (69.8%). The ratings of mothers were significantly higher than the physicians (8.1 points and 6.1 points, respectively; p < 0.001). No difference was found in terms of taste, smell, and appearance for Neocate junior-Numil® between the mothers' and physicians' ratings. Since caregivers have responsibility for careful selection of replacement products for infants with cow milk protein allergy, it is noteworthy that increased awareness and confidence in the palatability characteristics of these products should motivate mothers and physicians to comply with replacement treatment in the long term.

Neuropsychiatric adverse drug reactions induced by montelukast impair the quality of life in children with asthma.

INTRODUCTION: Montelukast-induced neuropsychiatric adverse drug reactions (ADRs) have been reported in retrospective studies. This study aimed to reveal the neuropsychiatric ADRs triggered in patients taking montelukast due to asthma in real time, and to evaluate the effect of these ADRs on quality of life (QoL). METHODS: Patients, ages 3-18 years, taking montelukast for the first time and their parents were included. Ages 3-7 years were defined as the preschool and ages 8-18 years as the school-age group. At the beginning of the study and at the end of the second week of treatment, the neuropsychiatric complaint assessment questionnaire and the KINDL QoL scale were administered to patients and their parents. The effect of ADRs on the decrease in QoL was evaluated by multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Neuropsychiatric ADRs were reported in 78 (62.4%) of 125 patients, who recovered when the drug was discontinued. Temperamental behavior, nightmares and sleep disorders occurred significantly more often in both groups compared with pretreatment (p < 0.001 for each). In both groups, except in the child-reported family relationships subscale in the school-age group, significant decreases were found in both child and parent proxy-reported QoL total/sub-scores compared with pretreatment (p˂0.001 for each). It was found in the evaluation that the overall QoL of those experiencing ADRs in both age groups was more affected. (Child-reported QoL ORpreschool age=2.66, p = 0.048; ORschool-age=5.95, p = 0.027; parent-proxy QoL ORpreschool age =3.52, p = 0.010, ORschool-age=6.43, p = 0.027). CONCLUSIONS: Montelukast-induced neuropsychiatric ADRs are more frequent than reported in the literature and negatively impact children's QoL.

Comparison of practical application steps of the previously used adrenaline auto injector in Turkey (EpiPen) and the currently available adrenaline auto injector (Penepin): a multi-center study.

AIM: It has been shown by a great number of studies that the correct use of adrenaline auto injectors prescribed to patients with anaphylaxis is associated with the design of the auto injector, in addition to training. The aim of this study was to compare the skills of adults in using two different auto injectors prescribed to patients with anaphylaxis. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Parents of patients aged between 1 and 18 years who referred to allergy outpatients were included in the study. RESULTS: A total of 630 volunteers from nine centers were included in the study. Four hundred fifty-seven (72.5%) of the participants were females and 235 (37.3%) were undergraduates. The rate of showing all the steps of auto injector trainers correctly by the participants was found as (60.2%) (n=379) for EpiPen and 42.9% (n=270) for Penepin (p<0.001). The most frequent mistake with both auto injector trainers was the step of "place appropriate injection tip into outer thigh/press the trigger so it clicks." When the preferences of the volunteers were asked after training and application, 527 (83.7%) chose EpiPen, stating that it was easier and simpler to use. CONCLUSIONS: Our study showed that the correct usage rates of both adrenaline auto injectors were much lower than expected and there could be mistakes in the application of both. It could be appropriate to make improvements in the design of Penepin, which is still the only available adrenaline auto injector in Turkey, such that its application steps will be simpler and quicker.

Long-term follow-up of re-sting reactions in children with moderate to severe venom hypersensitivity.

UNLABELLED: Few data exists about re-sting reactions and their prognosis in children with moderate to severe venom hypersensitivity. The reasons behind not consenting to or prematurely ending venom immunotherapy (VIT) and the preparedness of children who refused or quit VIT for future moderate-severe systemic reaction (SR) to re-stings have not been studied. Data on children with moderate to severe SR after Hymenoptera stings was collected for a 17-year period using our database. A standardized questionnaire was administered to patients who accepted to be interviewed at the clinic. These patients were evaluated in terms of their preparedness for future moderate-severe SR to re-stings. A total of 55 children, 75 % of whom commenced on VIT, were included in the analysis. Different reasons exist for not consenting to VIT; the most common of which is living at a distance from the allergy center. There were no differences in terms of the number of re-stung patients (27.7 and 27.2 %, respectively) and moderate-severe SR (60 and 16.6 %, respectively) between children who prematurely ended or who did not consent to VIT and children who completed VIT. Sixty-four percent of the children who refused or discontinued VIT were not prepared for future moderate-severe SR to re-stings. CONCLUSION: Long-term prognosis for re-sting reactions is good in children with moderate to severe SR to venoms. Some of the reasons behind refusing or discontinuing VIT may be related to quality of life issues. Preparedness of children who refused or discontinue VIT in emergencies is very low.

Pediatricians manage anaphylaxis poorly regardless of episode severity.

BACKGROUND: No information exists on how the knowledge or the practice of pediatricians regarding anaphylaxis episodes vary with episode severity. The aim of this study was to assess and compare pediatrician knowledge on the management of mild and severe anaphylaxis using clinical scenarios and to determine factors that affect their decisions. METHODS: A questionnaire consisting of eight questions on the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis was distributed at two national congresses. A uniform answer box including possible response choices was given below each question, and respondents were asked to check the answers that they thought appropriate. The management of mild and severe anaphylaxis was examined using two clinical case scenarios involving initial treatment, monitoring, and discharge recommendations. RESULTS: Four hundred and ten questionnaires were analyzed. The percentage of pediatricians who correctly answered all questions on the management of mild and severe anaphylaxis scenarios was 11.3% and 3.2%, respectively. Pediatricians did significantly better with initial treatment, but they were less knowledgeable with respect to observation time and discharge criteria in the mild anaphylaxis case scenario compared with the severe one (both P < 0.001). Multiple logistic regression analysis identified only working in an emergency department or intensive care unit as significantly predicting correct diagnosis of anaphylaxis among pediatricians (P = 0.01, 95% confidence interval: 0.11-0.57). No pediatrician-related factors predicted physician knowledge on the management of anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatricians have difficulty with different steps in managing mild and severe anaphylaxis. Their deficiencies in management may result in failure to prevent recurrences of mild anaphylaxis and may increase mortality in severe anaphylaxis.

Comparison of moderate to severe systemic reactions with honeybee and wasp in children.

BACKGROUND: The effect of the type of Hymenoptera on the severity of systemic reactions (SRs) is a controversial issue. The aim of the present study was to evaluate demographic, clinical, diagnostic, and therapeutic features of moderate-to-severe SRs in children with venom hypersensitivity and to compare the role of the honeybee and wasp stings in these reactions. METHODS: Data on children with moderate-to-severe SRs after a Hymenoptera sting were retrospectively collected for a 17-year period. RESULTS: A total of 55 children with moderate-to-severe SRs (wasp: 44, honeybee: 11) to venom stings were included in the study. In the honeybee group, comorbid allergic rhinitis and any type of atopic disease was more frequent compared to the wasp group (p = 0.009 and p = 0.01, respectively). In 50.9% of the children, family history of SR to the same venom type was higher in the honeybee group (p = 0.02). Dyspnea was more frequent in the wasp, and cyanosis was more frequent in the honeybee compared to each other (p = 0.02 and p < 0.001, respectively). Prick tests results were significantly different between the groups (p = 0.038). There was no difference between honeybee and wasp in moderate-to-severe SR groups in terms of seasonal tendency, age at admission, age at first SR, gender, previous history of SR, sting localization, latency, and affected organ systems (p > 0.05 for each). CONCLUSION: Moderate-to-severe SRs with honeybee and wasp venoms in children may differ in the severity of respiratory symptoms/signs at presentation, in addition to comorbidity of atopic diseases and family history of the SRs.

Potential predictors of relapse after treatment of asthma exacerbations in children.

BACKGROUND: Knowledge of factors that affect relapse will allow close monitoring of patients at risk, resulting in a decreased rate of readmission to the emergency department. OBJECTIVE: To determine risk factors associated with relapse within 7 days after treatment of asthma exacerbations in children. METHODS: This was a multicenter, prospective study of children with asthma attacks. Patients between the ages of 6 months and 17 years who met the criteria between June 2009 and September 2012 were considered. RESULTS: The study included 1177 patients (775 males [65.8%]) with a mean (SD) age of 70.72 (48.24) months. Of them, 199 (16.9%) had a relapse within 1 week after being discharged from the hospital. Factors independently associated with relapse identified by a logistic regression model for the 1,177 study visits were having taken a short-acting inhaled ß2-agonist within 6 hours before admission (odds ratio [OR], 2.43; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.728-3.426; P = .001), presence of retraction on physical examination (OR, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.123-2.774; P = .01), no prescription for high-dose inhaled steroids on release (OR, 2.02; 95% CI, 1.370-3.002; P < .001), and not being given a written instructional plan (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.080-2.226; P = .02). CONCLUSION: Whereas having taken short-acting ß2-agonists within 6 hours before admission and the presence of retractions on physical examination increased the risk of relapse after treatment of the acute attack, being given high-dose inhaled steroids and a written instructional plan when being sent home reduced the risk.

Predictive factors to differentiate between allergic and nonallergic rhinitis in children.

BACKGROUND: Although symptoms and signs of allergic rhinitis (AR) and nonallergic rhinitis (NAR) are similar, treatment and follow-up are different. We aimed to find predictive factors that can be used in primary health care to differentiate AR from NAR. METHODS: We made a retrospective analysis of cases aged 6-18 years old who were diagnosed as having chronic rhinitis within a 1-year period. Skin-prick tests were done and severity of rhinitis symptoms was recorded on a visual analog scale in all patients. RESULTS: There were 472 cases whose medical records were complete and included in the analysis. The median age was 11 (interquartile range [IQR], 5) years. AR was diagnosed in 363 patients (76.9%) and was different from NAR with respect to: median age (p = 0.042), seasonality of the symptoms (p = 0.002), persistent symptoms (p = 0.003), moderate/severe according to visual analogue scale (VAS) score (p = 0.017), conjunctivitis (p < 0.001), parental history of AR (p = 0.026), rhinorrhea (p < 0.001), sneezing (p = 0.005), mucosal pallor (p = 0.004), and response to antihistamines (p = 0.035). All parameters with a significance of p < 0.1 between AR and NAR were included in logistic regression analysis. Seasonality, sneezing, moderate/severe rhinitis, and response to antihistamines were identified as significant independent parameters to differentiate AR from NAR. CONCLUSION: Features of rhinitis patients with seasonality, sneezing, moderate/severe rhinitis, and response to antihistamines may help in differentiation of AR from NAR at the primary care level.

Children with chronic nonspecific isolated cough.

BACKGROUND: This study observed children with chronic nonspecific isolated cough (NIC) to investigate clinical differences between children whose symptoms resolved spontaneously and those who eventually developed asthma and then explored the differences among the children who eventually developed asthma in terms of their time of response to a trial of inhaled corticosteroid (ICS). METHODS: Children with chronic NIC were managed either with a wait-and-review approach or with a 2-week trial with 400 µg/d inhaled budesonide according to the preference of their parents. Responses were monitored with a validated cough score. Treatment was prolonged to 8 weeks in the case of partial responders. All children were followed up at 3-month intervals. RESULTS: A total of 109 children (median [interquartile range] age, 5 [3.5-9] years; cough duration, [8-16] weeks]) were followed for a mean (± SD) time of 21(± 5) months. Cough did not recur in 71% (spontaneous resolution) but relapsed in 28% of the children who later responded to ICS treatment again (asthma). Aeroallergen sensitization (relative risk, 2.86; 95% CI, 1.17-6.99) and previous history of chronic cough (relative risk, 2.68; 95% CI, 1.10-6.49) increased the risk of asthma. Cough duration, the cough score, the family history of asthma, and serum eosinophilia were not found discriminative for the final diagnosis. There were no differences among children who eventually developed asthma and responded to either the 2-week or 8-week trial in terms of the study parameters. CONCLUSIONS: Chronic NIC does not recur in the majority of children. Initial response to the ICS trial may be misleading but the trial may be preferred for children who have atopic sensitization, a previous history of chronic cough, or both .

Does self-monitoring by means of symptom diaries improve asthma control in children?

OBJECTIVE: Keeping symptom diaries on a regular basis may facilitate the execution of symptom-based action plans, enhance the patients' adherence to treatment program and finally allow better asthma control. We hypothesize that disease control in children who keep symptom diaries regularly would be better compared to children who do not keep symptom diaries regularly. METHODS: Asthmatic children, aged between 6 and 17 years, who were monitored at least 2 years at our outpatient clinic and examined at least twice within the last year, were enrolled in this study. The patients were assigned to the following two groups: group I included the patients who keep symptom diaries regularly and group II included the patients who do not keep symptom diaries regularly. Asthma control parameters of patients during the last year were investigated. The number of asthma attacks require systemic corticosteroid use, the frequency of emergency department (ED) admissions and the number of attacks requiring hospitalization, forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) values and asthma control test (ACT) scores were compared. RESULTS: 89 (26.2%) of 340 patients included in the study were identified to keep a symptom diary regularly. Although age (p = 0.20) and sex (p = 0.48) did not differ significantly between the groups, regular use of anti-inflammatory drug was found to be significantly higher in group I (p < 0.001). When all of the study parameters were compared using a multivariate analysis, the number of systemic corticosteroid use, ED visits, attacks requiring hospitalization and ACT scores and FEV1 did not differ significantly between the groups (p > 0.05 in all of the parameters). CONCLUSIONS: Keeping a symptom diary on a regular basis in asthmatic children was shown to have neither beneficial effect on the day-to-day asthma control nor a decrease in the future risk of asthma control.

Airway inflammation and bronchial hyperreactivity in steroid naive children with intermittent and mild persistent asthma.

BACKGROUND: Intermittent and mild persistent asthma are defined according to symptom frequency and spirometry and treated differently. To our knowledge, there is no study comparing airway inflammation between intermittent and mild persistent asthmatic children. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Children aged 7-16 years, referred to our pediatric allergy clinic for recurrent respiratory complaints underwent a detailed clinical history and spirometry with reversibility. None of the subjects had been using regular anti-inflammatory treatment. After a 2-week run-in period during which asthma symptoms were recorded, exhaled NO measurement, bronchial provocation test with adenosine monophosphate and methacholine and sputum induction were performed. Data of patients with intermittent and mild persistent asthma and a control group were compared. RESULTS: Thirty intermittent, 26 mild persistent asthmatic children, and 21 control subjects were studied. Sputum was obtained from 19 of intermittent asthmatics (63.3%), 18 of mild persistent asthmatics (69.2%), and 13 of control subjects (61.9%). Eosinophil count and exhaled nitric oxide were not different between asthmatic groups. Neutrophil count of children with mild persistent asthma was higher than the intermittent asthmatic group (P = 0.003). Geometric mean of PC20 methacoline values were not different between groups (P = 0.058). Geometric mean of PC20 AMP was lower among patients with mild persistent asthma (P = 0.102). CONCLUSION: Eosinophilic airway inflammation and direct BHR may not be significantly different in intermittent asthmatic children from their peers with mild persistent disease. Neutrophilic airway inflammation and BHR to an indirect stimuli are more pronounced in the mild persistent group.

Short-term follow-up of episodic wheeze and predictive factors for persistent wheeze.

Wheezing phenotypes may not be stable, and phenotype transitions may occur over time. This study investigates the natural course of episodic viral wheezing (EVW) and identifies the risk factors that predict persistence of wheezing through short-term follow-up. The medical records of children <3 years of age at hospital admission and classified as having EVW were retrospectively screened by two pediatric allergists. A total of 236 children were classified as having EVW between January 2010 and February 2011. The median follow-up period was 19.5 months. At the end of follow-up, wheezing persisted in 145 patients (61.4%) and changed to multiple-trigger wheeze in 37 patients (15.7%). Factors associated with persistent wheeze were age at initial wheezing <24 months, anti-inflammatory treatment at the time of diagnosis, history of severe episodic wheeze in the previous year, wheezing requiring systemic steroids in the previous year, frequent episodic wheeze, parental asthma, and a positive modified asthma predictive index (mAPI) for major criteria (each, p < 0.05). The logistic regression analysis revealed three independent risk factors: anti-inflammatory treatment at the time of diagnosis (p = 0.03), history of severe episodic wheeze in the previous year (p = 0.02), and a positive mAPI for major criteria (p = 0.02). The initial wheezing phenotype may vary over time. History of severe episodic wheeze in the previous year, anti-inflammatory treatment at the time of diagnosis, and a positive mAPI for major criteria predicts persistent wheeze at short-term follow-up.

Angioedema without urticaria in childhood.

BACKGROUND: There has been no separate study investigating angioedema without urticaria (Aw/oU) exclusively in children so far. The purpose of this study was to investigate the frequency, clinical presentation, etiology, management and follow-up of Aw/oU in children. METHODS: This is a prospective study that included all consecutive patients with a history of Aw/oU referred to our clinic between January 2011 and May 2012. A standard diagnostic and therapeutic algorithm was applied to all patients. RESULTS: The frequency of Aw/oU was found to be 1.6% during the study period. An etiological factor could be found in only 45 patients (49%). The causes of Aw/oU were infection (21%), allergy (14%), thyroid autoimmunity (TA)-related (8%) and nonsteroid anti-inflammatory drug hypersensitivity (6%), and idiopathic angioedema (51%). There was no hereditary type I, II or acquired type of angioedema or rare syndromes associated with Aw/oU. The median follow-up was 16 months (range: 12-30 months). Antihistamine prophylaxis was initiated at therapeutic doses in 20 patients with frequently recurrent angioedema due to idiopathic and euthyroid TA-related Aw/oU for 3 months. These patients responded to antihistamine prophylaxis for 3 months. Four patients relapsed after cessation of prophylaxis at the end of 3 months. Antihistamine prophylaxis was prolonged to 6 months in three patients and to 9 months in one patient. CONCLUSIONS: Angioedema without urticaria in children is a rare condition and no etiology can be identified in half of them. Antihistamine treatment alone is sufficient, and prognosis is good in recurrent non hereditary cases in a short-term follow-up period.

Anaphylaxis in infancy compared with older children.

Although there has been increasing data on pediatric anaphylaxis, information about anaphylaxis in the 1st year of life is scarce. This study provides detailed information on clinical signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis in the 1st year of life. A retrospective review was performed of our pediatric allergy database between 2007 and 2011. Children who met the diagnostic criteria of anaphylaxis were included. They were categorized as "infant" if they were ≤12 months of age at the time of anaphylactic reaction and "children" if >12 months. There were 104 patients (60 male and 44 female subjects) who met the diagnosis criteria of anaphylaxis. From the 104 cases of anaphylaxis, 23 (22.1%) were infants. Boys (p = 0.043), atopic eczema (p = 0.049), and history of food allergy (p < 0.001) were significantly higher in infants than in children with anaphylaxis. Severe anaphylaxis was less frequent in infants than in children (p = 0.04). There was no significant difference between infants and children considering cutaneous and respiratory symptoms (p > 0.05 for both) but persistent vomiting was (p = 0.023). Irritability, persistent crying, and somnolence are the signs which are difficult to interpret in infants with anaphylaxis. Within these signs, irritability, persistent crying, and somnolence were present in 69.6, 43.5, and 26.1% of infants, respectively. Blood pressure was measured in 5 infants (21.7%) compared with 44 children (54.3%; p = 0.005). Four children (4.9%) required more than one epinephrine treatment, but no infant did. Median observation periods were 4 hours in both groups (p = 0.087) and no biphasic reactions occurred in either. Food (p < 0.001) was significantly more and drugs (p = 0.015) were a less frequent cause of anaphylaxis in infants than in children. Anaphylaxis in infants is not rare but many signs of anaphylaxis are overlooked and still undertreated.

Management preferences of pediatricians in moderate and severe acute asthma.

OBJECTIVE: To assess and compare management preferences of physicians for moderate and severe acute asthma based on case scenarios and to determine the factors influencing their decisions. METHODS: A questionnaire based on the Global Initiative on Asthma (GINA) guideline and comprising eight questions on management of acute asthma was delivered to participants of two national pediatric congresses. Management of moderate and severe acute asthma cases was evaluated by two clinical case scenarios for estimation of acute attack severity, initial treatment, treatment after 1h, and discharge recommendations. A uniform answer box comprising the possible choices was provided just below the questions, and respondents were requested to tick the answers they thought was appropriate. RESULTS: Four-hundred and eighteen questionnaires were analyzed. All questions regarding moderate and severe acute asthma case scenarios were answered accurately by 15.8% and 17.0% of physicians, respectively. The initial treatment of moderate and severe cases was known by 100.0% and 78.2% of physicians, respectively. Knowledge of the appropriate plan for treatment after 1h was low both for moderate (45.0%) and severe attacks (35.4%). Discharge recommendations were adequate in 32.5% and 70.8% of physicians for moderate and severe attacks, respectively. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that working at a hospital with a continuing medical education program was the only significant predictor of a correct response to all questions regarding severe attacks (p = .04; 95%CI, 1.02-3.21). No predictors were found for information on moderate attacks. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatricians have difficulty in planning treatment after 1 hour both for moderate and severe asthma attacks. Postgraduate education programs that target physicians in hospitals without continuing medical education facilities may improve guideline adherence.

A real-life study on acquired skills from using an adrenaline autoinjector.

BACKGROUND: Training programs performed by allergists have increased the ability of patients' recognition and management of anaphylaxis. We aim to investigate the permanence of effect of an anaphylaxis training program and to determine the factors affecting it beyond training given by allergists. METHODS: Children and/or their caregivers who had been prescribed an adrenaline autoinjector at least 1 year before were invited to take part in the study. The knowledge about anaphylaxis was assessed using a questionnaire and the skills were practically tested. RESULTS: Sixty-four (50 caregivers/14 children >12 years of age) of 80 patients who accepted the invitation were included in the study. Fifty-nine patients obtained the autoinjector after initial prescription. Among them, 42 (71%) still had the device at the time of the study. The most common reason for not having the autoinjector was no longer feeling it was necessary (54.6%). Of the cases, 39.4% were competent in autoinjector use. There was a significant relation between adrenaline autoinjector competency and regular allergy visits (p = 0.010), believing that it is necessary (p = 0.04), having an adrenaline autoinjector (p = 0.003), and previous history of severe anaphylaxis (p = 0.010). Autoinjector competency score decreased as time elapsed from the last visit (rho = -0.382; p = 0.002) and the first instruction (rho = -0.317; p = 0.01). Regular visits (p = 0.009) and history of severe anaphylaxis (p = 0.007) were found as independent factors having an effect on adrenaline autoinjector competency. CONCLUSIONS: Training of patients/caregivers by allergists does not guarantee the permanence of acquired skills on anaphylaxis in the long run. Regular follow-up visits should be fostered.

Tolmetin: An Option for Multiple NSAID Hypersensitivity in a Preschooler.

The diagnostic process of multiple nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAID)-induced hypersensitivity should result with providing the patient a safe alternative. However, concomitant reactivity to acetaminophen severely limits those options in children, as no approved drug is available especially for children below the age of 12. A 3-year-old boy developed facial angioedema with ibuprofen, ketoprofen, metamizole sodium, and acetaminophen, but tolerated tolmetin sodium, which is confirmed by a challenge test. He has also used it as an antipyretic during febrile infections without any reaction. This is the first report suggesting an approved drug, tolmetin sodium, as a safe alternative for multiple NSAID-concomitant acetaminophen-reactive children.

The first experience of eosinophilic esophagitis in Turkish children.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Eosinophilic esophagitis is a rare allergic disease of the esophagus with no published data in Turkish children. METHODS: This is an observational study of children diagnosed as eosinophilic esophagitis in our hospital between February 2009 and January 2011. We retrospectively analyzed the clinical features, allergic work-up, endoscopic and histological findings, and response to treatment. RESULTS: We followed seven patients in this period with a histopathologic diagnosis of eosinophilic esophagitis. The mean age at diagnosis was 5.05±2.97 years (range: 1-9 years), and four of them were male. The most frequent symptom was gastroesophageal reflux disease-like symptoms (vomiting, regurgitation, and heartburn) (42.9%). Peripheral eosinophilia and high serum total IgE levels were found in four patients (57.2%). Sensitization to food (71.4%) was more frequent than that of aeroallergens (28.6%). Endoscopic findings suggestive of eosinophilic esophagitis were present in four patients (57.2%). Comorbid allergic disease was present in five patients (71.4%). All patients were treated by elimination diet (85.7%) and/or inhaled corticosteroid treatment (71.4%). The mean follow-up period was 12.4±6.1 months (range: 6-24 months). All but one patient showed complete clinical response to their treatment. No significant side effect was observed during the follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: Eosinophilic esophagitis is a rare gastrointestinal allergic disorder frequently comorbid with other allergic diseases and with different manifestations and response profiles to treatment modalities.

Effect of epinephrine autoinjector design on unintentional injection injury.

Epinephrine is an essential medication for the treatment of anaphylaxis. Factors associated with autoinjector design may have a role in its correct use. We compared a new and old epinephrine autoinjector with respect to correct autoinjector use. We invited all interns of the 2011-2012 training period in our medical school. The participants were randomly assigned into two groups. After all participants were given a three-step written and visual instruction sheet about epinephrine autoinjector use, they were asked to show its use either with the old or the new epinephrine autoinjector trainer. The old and new trainers, which were exactly identical to the original epinephrine autoinjectors except for the medication and needle, were used. The performance of each participant was assessed with a standardized scoring system. Among 220 invited interns, 180 (81.8%) were enrolled. The number of participants correctly showing the use of epinephrine autoinjectors and the mean total score did not differ significantly between the two groups (p = 0.639 and p = 0.233, respectively). Significantly fewer participants had unintentional injections in the new compared with the old epinephrine autoinjector group (p < 0.001). When all assessment steps are considered, only the rate of placing a wrong tip into the outer thigh was significantly lower in the new compared with the old epinephrine autoinjector group (p < 0.05). The new epinephrine autoinjector is more effective in unintentional injection injuries than the old one; however, it still does not fulfill the criteria of an ideal epinephrine autoinjector.