Background: Alopecia areata (AA) is an autoimmune, nonscarring hair loss disorder with slightly greater prevalence in children than adults. Various treatment modalities exist; however, their evidence in pediatric AA patients is lacking.Objective: To evaluate the evidence of current treatment modalities for pediatric AA. Methods:We conducted a systematic review on the PubMed database in October 2019 for all published articles involving patients \18 years old. Articles discussing AA treatment in pediatric patients were included, as were articles discussing both pediatric and adult patients, if data on individual pediatric patients were available.Results: Inclusion criteria were met by 122 total reports discussing 1032 patients. Reports consisted of 2 randomized controlled trials, 4 prospective comparative cohorts, 83 case series, 2 case-control studies, and 31 case reports. Included articles assessed the use of aloe, apremilast, anthralin, anti-interferon gamma antibodies, botulinum toxin, corticosteroids, contact immunotherapies, cryotherapy, hydroxychloroquine, hypnotherapy, imiquimod, Janus kinase inhibitors, laser and light therapy, methotrexate, minoxidil, phototherapy, psychotherapy, prostaglandin analogs, sulfasalazine, topical calcineurin inhibitors, topical nitrogen mustard, and ustekinumab.Limitations: English-only articles with full texts were used. Manuscripts with adult and pediatric data were only incorporated if individual-level data for pediatric patients were provided. No meta-analysis was performed. Conclusion:Topical corticosteroids are the preferred first-line treatment for pediatric AA, as they hold the highest level of evidence, followed by contact immunotherapy. More clinical trials and comparative studies are needed to further guide management of pediatric AA and to promote the potential use of pre-existing, low-cost, and novel therapies, including Janus kinase inhibitors.

No abstract

Objectives: The objective was to determine if hospital admission of children with blunt abdominal trauma for observation of possible intraabdominal injury (IAI) is necessary after a normal abdominal computed tomography (CT) scan in the emergency department (ED). Methods:The authors conducted a prospective observational cohort study of children less than 18 years of age with blunt abdominal trauma who underwent an abdominal CT scan in the ED. Abdominal CT scans were obtained with intravenous contrast but no oral contrast. The decision to hospitalize the patient was made by the attending emergency physician (EP) with the trauma or pediatric surgery teams. An abnormal abdominal CT scan was defined by the presence of any visualized IAI or findings suggestive of possible IAI (e.g., intraperitoneal fluid without solid organ injury). Patients were followed to determine if IAI was later diagnosed and the need for acute therapeutic intervention if IAI was present.Results: A total of 1,295 patients underwent abdominal CT, and 1,085 (84%) patients had normal abdominal CT scans in the ED and make up the study population. Seven-hundred thirty-seven (68%) were hospitalized, and 348 were discharged to home. None of the 348 patients discharged home and 2 of the 737 hospitalized patients were identified with an IAI after a normal initial abdominal CT. The IAIs in patients with normal initial CT scans included a 10-year-old with a mesenteric hematoma and serosal tear at laparotomy and a 10-year-old with a perinephric hematoma on repeat CT. Neither underwent specific therapy. The negative predictive value (NPV) of a normal abdominal CT scan for IAI was 99.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 99.3% to 100%). Conclusions:Children with blunt abdominal trauma and a normal abdominal CT scan in the ED are at very low risk of having a subsequently diagnosed IAI and are very unlikely to require a therapeutic intervention. Hospitalization of children for evaluation of possible undiagnosed IAI after a normal abdominal CT scan has a low yield and is generally unnecessary.ACADEMIC EMERGENCY MEDICINE 2008; 15:895-899 ª

No abstract

No abstract