¿Es útil el cribado familiar en el déficit selectivo de inmunoglobulina A? / Is familial screening useful in selective immunoglobulin A deficiency?

INTRODUCCIÓN: El déficit selectivo de IgA (DSIgA) es la inmunodeficiencia primaria más frecuente, siendo a menudo asintomática. Se ha descrito una elevada agregación familiar, sin conocerse el defecto genético causante ni su mecanismo hereditario. OBJETIVOS: Definir la utilidad del cribado de los familiares de primer grado de los pacientes con DSIgA valorando si los casos familiares presentan unas características clínicas e inmunológicas más graves que los casos esporádicos (CE) y si los familiares diagnosticados de DSIgA presentan sintomatología clínica significativa para justificar su cribado. PACIENTES Y MÉTODOS: Estudio transversal descriptivo (octubre del 2010-septiembre del 2011) de todos los pacientes con DSIgA controlados en nuestro centro, con revisión de datos demográficos, clínicos y analíticos. Se consideró como caso familiar (CF) todo aquel con al menos un familiar de primer grado (FPG) con DSIgA. RESULTADOS: De los 130 participantes, 42 eran pacientes con DSIgA y 88 FPG. Se diagnosticaron 13 CF (31%), 29 CE (69%) y 14 (16%) FPG enfermos (FPG-E). El número necesario a analizar para encontrar un FPG-E fue de 6 familiares. No hubo diferencias clínicas entre los pacientes. Hubo una proporción mayor de patología intestinal (p = 0,001, OR=9,57, IC del 95%, 2,59-35,3), ingresos (p = 0,045, OR=4,01; IC del 95%, 1,10-14,67) y necesidad de tratamiento crónico (p = 0,006, OR=5,5; IC del 95%, 1,57-19,54) en los FPG-E con respecto a los FPG sanos. CONCLUSIONES: A pesar de no encontrar más complicaciones clínicas en los CF de DSIgA, la elevada prevalencia de familiares afectados con afectación clínica significativa podría justificar la realización sistemática de estos programas de cribado

INTRODUCTION: Selective immunoglobulin A deficiency (SIgAD), the most common primary immunodeficiency, is often asymptomatic. High rates of familial clustering have been described in SIgAD, but the causative genetic defect and mechanism of inheritance are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether familial SIgAD cases show more severe clinical and immunological characteristics than sporadic ones; to investigate the utility of screening first-degree relatives (FDRs) of these patients, and to determine whether symptoms in affected family members are important enough to justify screening. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Descriptive, cross-sectional study (October 2010-September 2011) of all patients with SIgAD and followed up in our center. Demographic, clinical, and analytical data were reviewed. A familial case was defined as an SIgAD patient with at least one affected FDR. RESULTS: Of the 130 participants, 42 were SIgAD patients and 88 FDR. There were 13 (31%) familial cases and and 14 (16%) affected FDRs. Six family members had to be analyzed in order to detect one affected one. There were no clinical differences between familial and sporadic SIgAD cases. The percentages of intestinal disease (p=001, OR=9.57, 95%CI 2.59-35.3), hospitalizations (p=045, OR=4.01; 95%CI 1.10-14.67], and need for chronic treatment (p=006, OR=5.5; 95%CI 1.57-19.54) were higher in affected FDRs than in unaffected ones. CONCLUSIONS: The symptoms were not more severe in familial than sporadic SIgAD cases. Nonetheless, the elevated prevalence of affected FDRs with significant morbidity may justify routine screening of close family members of these patients

[Is familial screening useful in selective immunoglobulin A deficiency?]. / ¿Es útil el cribado familiar en el déficit selectivo de inmunoglobulina A?

INTRODUCTION: Selective immunoglobulin A deficiency (SIgAD), the most common primary immunodeficiency, is often asymptomatic. High rates of familial clustering have been described in SIgAD, but the causative genetic defect and mechanism of inheritance are unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether familial SIgAD cases show more severe clinical and immunological characteristics than sporadic ones; to investigate the utility of screening first-degree relatives (FDRs) of these patients, and to determine whether symptoms in affected family members are important enough to justify screening. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Descriptive, cross-sectional study (October 2010-September 2011) of all patients with SIgAD and followed up in our center. Demographic, clinical, and analytical data were reviewed. A familial case was defined as an SIgAD patient with at least one affected FDR. RESULTS: Of the 130 participants, 42 were SIgAD patients and 88 FDR. There were 13 (31%) familial cases and and 14 (16%) affected FDRs. Six family members had to be analyzed in order to detect one affected one. There were no clinical differences between familial and sporadic SIgAD cases. The percentages of intestinal disease (p=001, OR=9.57, 95%CI 2.59-35.3), hospitalizations (p=045, OR=4.01; 95%CI 1.10-14.67], and need for chronic treatment (p=006, OR=5.5; 95%CI 1.57-19.54) were higher in affected FDRs than in unaffected ones. CONCLUSIONS: The symptoms were not more severe in familial than sporadic SIgAD cases. Nonetheless, the elevated prevalence of affected FDRs with significant morbidity may justify routine screening of close family members of these patients.

Sepsis por Ewingella americana en lactante con nefropatía Congénita / Sepsis by Ewingella americana in an infant with congenital nephropathy

No disponible