Introduction In moderate‐severe asthma exacerbation, salbutamol by inhaler (MDI) is superior to salbutamol delivered by nebulizer (NEB); however, to our knowledge, no studies in children with exclusively severe exacerbations were performed. Objective To compare the efficacy of salbutamol and ipratropium bromide by MDI versus by NEB in severe asthma exacerbations. Methods We performed a clinical trial enrolling 103 children (2‐14 years of age) with severe asthma exacerbations (defined by the Pulmonary Score ≥ 7) seen at the emergency room in Asuncion, Paraguay. One group received salbutamol and ipratropium (two puff every 10 min for 2 h and then every 30 min for 2 h more) by MDI with a valved‐holding chamber and mask along with oxygen by a cannula separately (MDI‐SIB); and the other received nebulization with oxygen (NEB‐SIB) of salbutamol and ipratropium (1 every 20 min for 2 h and then every 30 min for 2 h more). Primary outcome was the rate of hospitalization (Pulmonary Score ≥ 7) after 4 h and secondary outcome was oxygen saturation. Results Fifty two children received MDI‐SIB and 51 NEB‐SIB. After the 4th hour, children on MDI‐SIB had significantly (P = 0.003) lower rate of hospital admission than on NEB‐SIB (5.8% vs 27.5%, RR: 0.21 [0.06‐0.69], respectively). Similarly, a significant improved clinical score after 60 min and increase in oxygen saturation after 90 min of treatment was observed in MDI‐SIB versus NEB‐SIB group (4.46 ± 0.7 vs 5.76 ± 0.65, P < 0.00001; and 90.5 ± 1.7 vs 88.43 1 ± 1, P < 0.00001, respectively). Conclusion Even in severe asthma exacerbations administration of salbutamol and ipratropium by MDI with valved‐holding chamber and mask along with oxygen by a cannula separately was more effective than by a nebulizer.

This document aims to provide an updated guideline for the diagnosis and management of acute gastroenteritis in pediatrics, as this disease is one of the main causes of consultations and hospitalizations. By performing an exhaustive review of the literature to produce a useful tool, this proposal aims to reduce the impact of the disease incidence, morbidity and mortality. The goal of gastroenteritis treatment is to prevent dehydration and electrolyte imbalance that it can produce, with adequate liquids, oral rehydration salts and maintenance of oral feeding. The causes of this disease are mostly viral and the criteria for antibiotic use is controversial. Treatment modalities to reduce the time of illness as well as the frequency of diarrhea are, in many cases, currently under study; therefore, guided, structured and systematized management will ensure the successful treatment of gastroenteritis in most children.

Los autores declaran que no existen conflictos de interés en el presente estudio. RESUMEN Introducción:Casos Clínicos: Discusión: Palabras clave:La Hepatitis autoinmune (HAI) en niños se constituye en una enfermedad inflamatoria del hígado, caracterizada histológicamente por un denso infiltrado de células mononucleares en el sistema porta, y serológicamente por la presencia de auto-anticuerpos específicos del hígado y aumento de los niveles de transaminasas e IgG, en ausencia de una patología conocida que pueda afectar el hígado. Se presenta un total de 10 casos con diagnóstico de HAI, la media de edad es de 12 años, con 2 de sexo femenino (20%) y 8 masculino (80%); 4 casos fueron de tipo 1, un caso de tipo 2, y a 5 pacientes no se los pudo clasificar. La elevación de transaminasas (> x10 su valor normal) se observó en el 70% de los casos y la hipergammaglobulinemia en todos los casos. El tratamiento instaurado consistió en corticosteroides y azatioprina en todos los pacientes, con un tiempo medio de remisión de 4-6 semanas. Se observó abandono de tratamiento en 3 casos de los 10 casos, 2 de ellos con desenlace fatal.La HAI presenta manifestaciones clínicas generales y específicas en etapas tempranas de la enfermedad. El alto porcentaje de respuesta al tratamiento médico nos hace considerar que el diagnóstico y tratamiento precoz son muy importantes, con el objetivo de detener la evolución a la cirrosis.Hepatitis autoinmune, enfermedad hepática crónica, hipergammaglobulinemia. ABSTRACTIntroduction:

No abstract

Introduction Fluid resuscitation and inotropic support are essential interventions to improve cardiovascular function in patients with septic shock. However, the optimal volume of fluids and the timing of inotropic support to achieve the resolution of shock are controversial. They may depend on the availability of critical care support services. Aims To compare early versus the delayed start of epinephrine administration after fluids bolus in children with septic shock. Methods We conducted an open-label randomized trial in which patients under 18 years of age diagnosed with septic shock and arterial hypotension were treated in two Pediatric Emergency Departments in Paraguay (Hospital de Clinicas of Universidad Nacional de Asunción and Instituto Privado del Niño) between 2015 and 2020. Septic shock was defined according to the American College of Critical Care Medicine (ACCM) guidelines. All patients received antibiotics and 40 ml/kg of fluids (two boluses of 20ml/kg if there were no signs of fluid overload) during the first hour. They were then divided into two groups: Group 1 received epinephrine infusion and maintenance fluids. Group 2 received an additional 20 ml/kg of fluids and then was started on epinephrine infusion. Results Of 229 patients screened, 63 patients were included in the study. The mean age was 2.8±3.5 years. A total of 52% were female. Group 1 comprised 33 patients, and group 2 comprised a total of 30. Significant differences were found between group 1 and group 2 in the following: mortality (10% vs. 33%, p: 0.026, RR: 3.1, CI: 95%: 1-10), need for mechanical ventilation (10% vs. 41%, p: 0.006, RR: 4, CI: 95%: 1.3-12), and altered vascular hypoperfusion after one hour of interventions (7% vs. 59%, p<0,001, RR: 8.2, CI: 95%: 2-32). Conclusions Early administration of epinephrine infusion after initial fluid therapy was associated with better clinical outcomes than delayed administration.

No abstract

No abstract