Paediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with COVID-19 (PIMS-TS) is a novel condition that was first reported in April, 2020. We aimed to develop a national consensus management pathway for the UK to provide guidance for clinicians caring for children with PIMS-TS. A three-phase online Delphi process and virtual consensus meeting sought consensus over the investigation, management, and research priorities from multidisciplinary clinicians caring for children with PIMS-TS. We used 140 consensus statements to derive a consensus management pathway that describes the initial investigation of children with suspected PIMS-TS, including blood markers to help determine the severity of disease, an echocardiogram, and a viral and septic screen to exclude other infectious causes of illness. The importance of a multidisciplinary team in decision making for children with PIMS-TS is highlighted throughout the guidance, along with the recommended treatment options, including supportive care, intravenous immunoglobulin, methylprednisolone, and biological therapies. These include IL-1 antagonists (eg, anakinra), IL-6 receptor blockers (eg, tocilizumab), and anti-TNF agents (eg, infliximab) for children with Kawasaki disease-like phenotype and non-specific presentations. Use of a rapid online Delphi process has made it possible to generate a national consensus pathway in a timely and cost-efficient manner in the middle of a global pandemic. The consensus statements represent the views of UK clinicians and are applicable to children in the UK suspected of having PIMS-TS. Future evidence will inform updates to this guidance, which in the interim provides a solid framework to support clinicians caring for children with PIMS-TS. This process has directly informed new PIMS-TS specific treatment groups as part of the adaptive UK RECOVERY trial protocol, which is the first formal randomised controlled trial of therapies for PIMS-TS globally.
Background Skin barrier dysfunction precedes eczema development. We tested whether daily use of emollient in the first year could prevent eczema in high-risk children.Methods We did a multicentre, pragmatic, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial in 12 hospitals and four primary care sites across the UK. Families were approached via antenatal or postnatal services for recruitment of term infants (at least 37 weeks' gestation) at high risk of developing eczema (ie, at least one first-degree relative with parentreported eczema, allergic rhinitis, or asthma, diagnosed by a doctor). Term newborns with a family history of atopic disease were randomly assigned (1:1) to application of emollient daily (either Diprobase cream or DoubleBase gel) for the first year plus standard skin-care advice (emollient group) or standard skin-care advice only (control group). The randomisation schedule was created using computer-generated code (stratified by recruiting centre and number of first-degree relatives with atopic disease) and participants were assigned to groups using an internet-based randomisation system. The primary outcome was eczema at age 2 years (defined by UK working party criteria) with analysis as randomised regardless of adherence to allocation for participants with outcome data collected, and adjusting for stratification variables. This trial is registered with ISRCTN, ISRCTN21528841. Data collection for longterm follow-up is ongoing, but the trial is closed to recruitment. Findings 1394 newborns were randomly assigned to study groups between Nov 19, 2014, and Nov 18, 2016; 693 were assigned to the emollient group and 701 to the control group. Adherence in the emollient group was 88% (466 of 532) at 3 months, 82% (427 of 519) at 6 months, and 74% (375 of 506) at 12 months in those with complete questionnaire data. At age 2 years, eczema was present in 139 (23%) of 598 infants with outcome data collected in the emollient group and 150 (25%) of 612 infants in the control group (adjusted relative risk 0•95 [95% CI 0•78 to 1•16], p=0•61; adjusted risk difference -1•2% [-5•9 to 3•6]). Other eczema definitions supported the results of the primary analysis. Mean number of skin infections per child in year 1 was 0•23 (SD 0•68) in the emollient group versus 0•15 (0•46) in the control group; adjusted incidence rate ratio 1•55 (95% CI 1•15 to 2•09).Interpretation We found no evidence that daily emollient during the first year of life prevents eczema in high-risk children and some evidence to suggest an increased risk of skin infections. Our study shows that families with eczema, asthma, or allergic rhinitis should not use daily emollients to try and prevent eczema in their newborn.
BackgroundPerioperative anaphylaxis (PA) in children is an uncommon but potentially life‐threatening complication associated with anesthesia. Early identification and management of PA is essential to optimize clinical outcomes.MethodsWe performed a retrospective study of anesthesia records from pediatric patients with PA from centers in the United Kingdom, France, and the United States over a period of 10 years. Time sequence of clinical signs and physiological variables during PA were collected, along with results of allergy testing.ResultsTwenty‐nine children with PA were included. Median age was 11 years. Based on the modified Ring and Messmer Grading Scale, severe reactions were seen in 25 (86%) members of this cohort, with 4 (14%) experiencing cardiac arrest. Life‐threatening hypotension was the first clinical sign of PA in 59% of cases, followed by tachycardia and bronchospasm. In 16 (55%) cases, the initial signs of PA involved multiple organ systems. When the initial signs of PA were cardiovascular and/or respiratory, more epinephrine doses were administered. Average time from initial sign of PA to treatment with epinephrine was 6 minutes (SD: 6, range: 1‐25). The causative allergen was identified in 15 patients.ConclusionSevere hypotension is the most common presenting sign of PA in children. Initial cardiovascular and/or respiratory signs are associated with the need for increased epinephrine doses. Further studies should optimize the prediction, identification, and early management of PA in children.
The Standards of Care Committee of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) and a committee of experts and key stakeholders have developed this guideline for the evaluation and testing of patients with an unsubstantiated label of penicillin allergy. The guideline is intended for UK clinicians who are not trained in allergy or immunology, but who wish to develop a penicillin allergy de‐labelling service for their patients. It is intended to supplement the BSACI 2015 guideline “Management of allergy to penicillin and other beta‐lactams” and therefore does not detail the epidemiology or aetiology of penicillin allergy, as this is covered extensively in the 2015 guideline (1). The guideline is intended for use only in patients with a label of penicillin allergy and does not apply to other beta‐lactam allergies. The recommendations include a checklist to identify patients at low risk of allergy and a framework for the conduct of drug provocation testing by non‐allergists. There are separate sections for adults and paediatrics within the guideline, in recognition of the common differences in reported allergy history and likelihood of true allergy.
Background: Live attenuated influenza vaccine (LAIV) is recommended for annual influenza vaccination in children from age 2 years. However, some guidelines recommend against its use in children with asthma or recurrent wheeze due to concerns over its potential to induce wheezing. Objective: We sought to assess the safety of LAIV in children with moderate to severe asthma, and in preschool children with recurrent wheeze. Methods: Prospective, multicenter, open-label, phase IV intervention study in 14 specialist UK clinics. LAIV was administered under medical supervision, with follow-up of asthma symptoms 72 hours and 4 weeks late, using validated questionnaires. Results: A total of 478 young people (median, 9.3; range, 2-18 years) with physician-diagnosed asthma or recurrent wheeze were recruited, including 208 (44%) prescribed high-dose inhaled corticosteroids and 122 (31%) with severe asthma. There was no significant change in asthma symptoms in the 4 weeks after administration (median change, 0; P 5 .26, McNemar test), with no impact of level of baseline asthma control/symptoms in predicting either a worsening of asthma or exacerbation after LAIV using a regression model. A total of 47 subjects (14.7%; 95% CI, 11%-19.1%) reported a severe asthma exacerbation in the 4 weeks after immunization, requiring a short course of systemic corticosteroids; in 4 cases, this occurred within 72 hours of vaccination. No association with asthma severity, baseline lung function, or asthma control was identified. Conclusions: LAIV appears to be well tolerated in the vast majority of children with asthma or recurrent wheeze, including those whose asthma is categorized as severe or poorly controlled.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.