Search

Objectives: To determine the clinical and laboratory differences between leukemic arthritis (LA) and juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA) at the onset of the disease., Material and Methods: Patients under 16 years of age, both genders, who presented for the first time to the pediatric rheumatology service with a diagnosis of probable JIA, with arthritis and without peripheral blood blasts, in which the final diagnosis was acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) or JIA. The clinical and laboratory characteristics of the patients were compared, chi-square and relative risk were used for categorical variables, and the Mann-Whitney U and T-test for the comparison of means between groups. A binary logistic regression model was developed to differentiate leukemic arthritis from JIA., Results: A total of 76 patients, 14 with LA and 62 with JIA, were analyzed. The mean age at diagnosis was lower in the leukemic arthritis group, the female gender prevailed in the JIA group, and the time to onset of symptoms was lower in the leukemic arthritis group. Patients with leukemic arthritis showed increased pain intensity, fever, weight loss, nocturnal diaphoresis, lymph node enlargement, hepatosplenomegaly, and pain that did not improve with analgesic administration. Laboratory parameters with statistical significance were the presence of anemia, leukopenia, and neutropenia. The platelet count was significant but in a low normal value, compared to the JIA. A binary logistic regression model was developed to differentiate leukemic arthritis from JIA. The probability associated with the statistic (Chi-square) was 0.000, and the Cox and Snell R2 and Nagelkerke R2 values were 0.615 and 1, respectively. The developed model correctly classified 100% of the cases., Conclusions: The diagnosis of acute lymphoblastic leukemia should be ruled out in patients who present with arthritis and hematological alterations, mainly leukopenia and neutropenia, with joint pain disproportionate to the degree of arthritis, predominantly at night and that does not improve with the use of analgesics, fever, lymph nodes, and hepatosplenomegaly. Criteria are suggested to differentiate both diseases., (© 2023. The Author(s).)

Objective: Describe the frequency of thrombotic and non-thrombotic clinical manifestations, laboratory, treatment and prognosis in patients with pediatric primary antiphospholipid syndrome., Material and Methods: A retrospective study was carried out in patients with a diagnosis of primary antiphospholipid antibody syndrome, under 16 years of age, under follow-up by the pediatric rheumatology service of the General Hospital, National Medical Center, La Raza, from January 2013 to December 2020. The antiphospholipid syndrome was defined when it met the laboratory criteria of the Sidney criteria and the presence of thrombosis or non-criteria manifestations of the disease (hematological, neurological, cutaneous, renal, cardiac or pulmonary). Demographic, clinical, laboratory, treatment, and prognosis data were collected., Results: We report 32 patients, 21 female (65%) and 11 male (35%), mean age 11.75 years, evolution time 16 weeks. Thrombosis 9 patients (28%), 1 arterial and 8 venous. Non-thrombotic manifestations; Hematologic: thrombocytopenia 22 patients (69%), autoimmune hemolytic anemia 13 (40%), Fisher-Evans syndrome 6 (19%), lupus anticoagulant with hypoprothrombinemia syndrome 2 (6%). Dermatological: livedo reticularis 20 (62%), skin ulcers 2 (6%), Raynaud's phenomenon 8 (25%). Neurological: epilepsy 1 (3%), migraine 3 (9%), chorea 1 (3%) and cognitive impairment 3 (9%). Renal in 4 (13%). Laboratory: prolonged aPTT 30 (93%), lupus anticoagulant 32 (100%), positive IgG anticardiolipin 20 (62%), positive IgM anticardiolipin 19 (60%). AntiB2GPI was performed in only 3 patients, being positive in all., Treatment: anticoagulation in patients with thrombosis, antiplatelet in 23 (72%), steroid 30 (94%), immunosuppressant 30 (94%) and rituximab 4 (12.5%). No deaths were reported., Conclusions: The clinical characteristics of patients with pediatric primary antiphospholipid syndrome differ from those presented in adults, since non-thrombotic manifestations are more frequent in children, for which classification criteria that include these manifestations are necessary for a better characterization of the disease in pediatric population., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objective: To develop a standardized steroid dosing regimen (SSR) for physicians treating childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) complicated by lupus nephritis (LN), using consensus formation methodology., Methods: Parameters influencing corticosteroid (CS) dosing were identified (step 1). Data from children with proliferative LN were used to generate patient profiles (step 2). Physicians rated changes in renal and extrarenal childhood-onset SLE activity between 2 consecutive visits and proposed CS dosing (step 3). The SSR was developed using patient profile ratings (step 4), with refinements achieved in a physician focus group (step 5). A second type of patient profile describing the course of childhood-onset SLE for ≥4 months since kidney biopsy was rated to validate the SSR-recommended oral and intravenous (IV) CS dosages (step 6). Patient profile adjudication was based on majority ratings for both renal and extrarenal disease courses, and consensus level was set at 80%., Results: Degree of proteinuria, estimated glomerular filtration rate, changes in renal and extrarenal disease activity, and time since kidney biopsy influenced CS dosing (steps 1 and 2). Considering these parameters in 5,056 patient profile ratings from 103 raters, and renal and extrarenal course definitions, CS dosing rules of the SSR were developed (steps 3-5). Validation of the SSR for up to 6 months post-kidney biopsy was achieved with 1,838 patient profile ratings from 60 raters who achieved consensus for oral and IV CS dosage in accordance with the SSR (step 6)., Conclusion: The SSR represents an international consensus on CS dosing for use in patients with childhood-onset SLE and proliferative LN. The SSR is anticipated to be used for clinical care and to standardize CS dosage during clinical trials., (© 2021, American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To describe clinical, radiological and treatment characteristics in pediatric patients with SLS., Material and Methods: This is a descriptive and retrospective study in patients under 16 years old with the diagnosis of SLE complicated by SLS at the General Hospital. National Medical Center La Raza. Clinical, radiological and treatment variables were analyzed. Results are shown in frequencies and percentages., Results: Data from 11 patients, 9 females and 2 males were collected. Mean age at diagnosis of SLS was 12.2 years. Age at diagnosis of SLE was 11.1 years. SLEDAI 17.3. Renal desease 72%, hematological 91%, lymphopenia 63%, mucocutaneous 72%, neurological 9%, arthritis 54%, serositis 91%, fever 81%, secondary antiphospholipid syndrome, low C3 72%, low C4 81%, positive ANA 91%, positive anti-DNA 91%. Regarding clinical manifestations of SLE: cough 81%, dyspnea 91%, hipoxemia 81%, pleuritic pain 71%, average oxygen saturation 83%. Chest X-rays findings: right hemidiaphragm affection 18%, left 63%, bilateral 18%. Elevated hemidiaphragm 91%, atelectasis 18%, pleural effusion 91%, over one third of the cardiac silhouette under the diphragm 36%, bulging diaphragm 45%, 5th. anterior rib that crosses over the diaphragm 91%. M-mode ultrasound: diaphragmatic hypomotility 100%, pleural effusion 63%. Pulmonary function tests: restrictive pattern in 45% of the cases. Treatment was with supplementary oxygen 100%, intubation 18%, antibiotics 100%, steroids 100%, intravenous immunoglobulin 54%, plasmapheresis 18%, cyclophosphamide 54% and rituximab 18%. The clinical course was favorable in 81%., Conclusions: SLS should be suspected in patients with SLE and active disease who present hipoxemia, pleuritic pain, cough, dyspnea, pleural effusion and signs of restriction on chest X-rays. Therefore, a diaphragmatic M-mode ultrasound should be performed in order to establish the diagnosis.

Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared.