Tattoos are defined as the intentional or accidental deposit of pigment into the skin. These pigments have been associated with various dermatoses such as allergic contact dermatitis, lichenoid dermatitis, photoinduced reactions, and granulomatous, sarcoid and pseudolymphomatous reactions. The objective of this report was to describe the various types of reactions to pigments and the importance of recognizing them clinically. Two cases are reported: one of lichenoid dermatitis resulting from a reaction to the red pigment of a tattoo and the other of a pseudolymphoma resulting from a reaction to red and lilac pigments and a photo-induced reaction to a yellow pigment. Removal generally requires multiple forms of treatment, most of which fail to remove the colors completely. Keywords: Coloring agents; Skin manifestations; TattooingResumo: A tatuagem é definida como deposição de pigmento intencional ou acidental na pele. Os pigmentos têm sido associados a diversas dermatoses, como a dermatite de contato alérgica, a dermatite liquenoide e as reações fotoinduzidas, granulomatosas, sarcoídeas e pseudolinfomatosas. Enfocam-se os diversos tipos de reações aos pigmentos e a importância de reconhecê-los clinicamente. São relatados dois casos: um de dermatite liquenoide sobre o pigmento vermelho e outro de pseudolinfoma sobre os pigmentos vermelho e lilás e de reação fotoinduzida sobre o amarelo. A remoção geralmente requer múltiplos tratamentos, e a maioria não retira as cores completamente.

Monilethrix is a rare defect of the hair shaft, with most cases showing an autosomal dominant pattern of inheritance and variable clinical expression. It is characterized by hypotrichosis secondary to hair fragility. The diagnosis is made through trichoscopy, detecting typical findings such as periodic narrowing at regular intervals, giving the hair the appearance of beads in a rosary. This article reports the case of six members of a family diagnosed with monilethrix with alopecia of varying degrees.

No abstract

Objective: Analyze postural control in the bipedal position as well as during gait and functional tests in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus after supervised and unsupervised proprioceptive training. Design: A three-group randomized controlled trial. Setting: Physiotherapeutic Resources Lab, Department of Health Sciences, Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo Subjects: Eighty patients with type 2 diabetes allocated to three groups: control, home training, and supervised training. Interventions: The supervised and home training groups performed two weekly sessions of proprioceptive exercises for 12 weeks. The control group was not submitted to any of treatment. Main measures: Bipedal balance, gait, and performance on functional tests were evaluated before and after 12 weeks using the Balance Evaluation Systems Test (BESTest) and the force plate. Results: No significant improvements were found regarding postural control, gait, or performance on the functional tests, as evidenced by the inter-group comparisons of the total BESTest score [control: 90.7 (81.5–92.6); home training: 85.2 (77.8–90.3); supervised training: 88.4 (82.6–91.4), P > 0.05] as well as the tests performed on the force plate ( P > 0.05). The clinical effect size of the proposed intervention was less than 0.2, demonstrating no effect for the main outcome variable evaluated by the “Sensory Orientation” item of the BESTest and by the mCTSIB (pressure plate). Conclusions: The proposed proprioceptive training did not lead to improvements in postural control in patients with type 2 diabetes with no clinical signs of diabetic distal polyneuropathy when analyzed using the BESTest clinical evaluation and a force plate. Trial registration: NCT01861392 (clinicaltrials.gov).