Search PubMed⌕ Search
Home/Archive/PubMed

PubMed · 17159718

[Localized scleroderma (morphea)].

Waafa Bono·Nicolas Dupin
View original source ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

DEFINITION AND FREQUENCY: Localized scleroderma, also known as morphea, is a sclerotic condition limited to the skin. The specific clinical entity depends on the extent, linear disposition and depth of the lesions. Morphea is ten times more prevalent than systemic sclerosis, and its prognosis is generally good: superficial forms resolve within 3 years. NO SYSTEMIC INVOLVEMENT: In the absence of symptoms, examinations to detect systemic involvement are purposeless. Plaque morphea is the most frequent clinical presentation. Serious manifestations include extensive morphea that may involve the entire skin or linear forms, especially in children, where they may be severe, especially on the face. There are no immunological markers clearly associated with morphea and no causative agents have been implicated in its pathogenesis, although sclerodermiform dermatitis is reported to be associated with some drugs and toxic agents. TREATMENT: There is no consensual treatment for morphea. Treatment should be decided according to severity and extent of lesions. Limited lesions may be treated with local steroids such as class IV corticosteroids. Systemic treatment (methotrexate) should be discussed in extensive and linear forms when there is a risk of functional or esthetic complications.

Explore related subjects

Administration, TopicalAdrenal Cortex HormonesAdultAge FactorsAnti-Inflammatory AgentsBalneologyChildClinical Trials as TopicClobetasolDermatologic AgentsDiagnosis, DifferentialFemaleGlucocorticoidsHumansImmunosuppressive AgentsIncidenceMaleMethotrexatePUVA TherapyPrevalencePrognosisRisk FactorsScleroderma, LocalizedSex FactorsTacrolimusTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeComparative StudyEnglish AbstractJournal ArticleReview

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Waafa Bono, Nicolas Dupin. 2006. [Localized scleroderma (morphea)].. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0755-4982(06)74926-0

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

PubMed2007

Endosonographic and manometric evaluation of internal anal sphincter in patients with chronic anal fissure and its correlation with clinical outcome after topical glyceryl trinitrate therapy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Anorectal pressure studies have demonstrated internal anal sphincter (IAS) hypertonia in patients with chronic anal fissure. It is unknown however, if these changes in IAS function are associated with any abnormality in sphincter morphology. The first aim was to investigate the clinical characteristics and the manometric and endosonographic findings of the IAS in a cohort of patients with chronic anal fissure. The second aim was to investigate the association between these findings and the outcome with topical Glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients who presented with chronic anal fissure from November 1999 to May 2004 were included after failure of conservative therapy. Anorectal manometry and anal endosonography were performed before treatment with 0.2% GTN ointment twice daily was initiated. Patients were evaluated after 8 weeks. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-four patients (66 women, mean age, 45.2 +/- 14.8 years) were included. Hypertonia of the IAS was found in 84 (68%) patients. The mean maximum IAS thickness was 3.6 +/- 0.76 mm (1.6-5.5). An abnormally thick IAS, adjusted by age, was observed in 113 (91.1%) patients. We found no correlation between resting pressure and IAS thickness (r = 0.074; p = 0.41). At 8 weeks, 52 patients (42%) had healed with complete symptoms resolution. No statistically significant differences were observed when clinical features and manometric and endosonographic findings were compared between healing and no-healing fissures. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients with chronic anal fissure present an abnormally thick IAS. Clinical, manometric and endosonographic features had no association with outcome after GTN treatment.

Administration, Topical↗
PubMed2007

Topical use of antifibrinolytic agents reduces postoperative bleeding: a double-blind, prospective, randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: Postoperative bleeding is still one of the most common complications of cardiac surgery. Antifibrinolytic agents successfully reduce bleeding, but there are controversies concerning adverse effects after their systemic use. By topical application of antifibrinolytic agents in pericardial cavity, most of these effects are avoided. We compared the effects of topically applied aprotinin, tranexamic acid and placebo on postoperative bleeding and transfusion requirements. METHODS: In this single-center prospective, randomized, double-blind trial, 300 adult cardiac patients were randomized into three groups to receive one million IU of aprotinin (AP group), 2.5g of tranexamic acid (TA group) or placebo (PL group) topically before sternal closure. Groups were comparable with respect to all preoperative and intraoperative variables. Postoperative bleeding, transfusion requirements and hematologic parameters were evaluated. RESULTS: Postoperative bleeding within first 12-h period (AP group 433+/-294 [350; 360]ml, TA group 391+/-255 [350; 305]ml, PL group 613+/-505 [525; 348]ml), as well as cumulative blood loss within 24h (AP group 726+/-432 [640; 525]ml, TA group 633+/-343 [545; 335]ml, PL group 903+/-733 [800; 445]ml), showed statistically significant inter-group differences (both p<0.001). Bleeding rates values were significantly higher in placebo group compared to the groups treated with antifibrinolytic agents (AP and TA groups) concerning both variables. Although TA group showed the lowest values, no statistical differences between TA and AP groups were found. Inter-group difference of blood product requirements was not statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Topical use of either tranexamic acid or aprotinin efficiently reduces postoperative bleeding. TA seems to be at least as potent as aprotinin, but potentially safer and with better cost-effectiveness ratio.

Administration, Topical↗