Comparative study between intralesional Dexamethasone and oral Prednisolone in the treatment of Infantile Hemangioma

T. A. Chowdhury, A. Bhuiyan, Mohammed Hakim
{"title":"Comparative study between intralesional Dexamethasone and oral Prednisolone in the treatment of Infantile Hemangioma","authors":"T. A. Chowdhury, A. Bhuiyan, Mohammed Hakim","doi":"10.3329/JPSB.V5I1.23884","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background : Infantile Hemangioma (IH) is one of the most common childhood neoplasm. Current treatments for children with endangering Infantile Hemangioma are limited, and include primarily oral corticosteroid which has many systemic adverse effects. Furthermore, approximately one third of IH does not respond to oral steroids, prompting active investigations for new treatments. Objective: To compare the efficacy, side effects, and influencing factors of oral Prednisolone and intralesional Dexamethasone (IL) in treatment of IH and thus to find out an effective, cheap and safe modality of treatment for this anomaly. Materials and Methods : This study was carried out on 48 patients of IH with the age range from 1 day to 12 years. Group A (n 1 =26) patients were treated by oral Prednisolone and group B (n 2 =22) patients were treated by IL Dexamethasone .Periorbital Hemangioma and IH >54 cubic centimeter were excluded. Therapeutic response of Prednisolone and Dexamethasone was graded as excellent, good, poor and no response. We monitored volume of the lesion and its color change to evaluate the response to treatment. Results: Overall therapeutic responses were 69.2% in Group A and 68.2% in group B. Side effects were noted in 65.4% patient of group A and 36.4% patient of group B. In group A, the commonest (38.5%) side effect was excessive weight gain with cushingoid facies and in group B, commonest (27.3%) side effect was ulceration at injection site. Side effects were more in children of group A. Range of treatment was 4-20 weeks in group A and in group B, it was 4-24 weeks. Conclusion : IL Dexamethasone is effective as oral Prednisolone for treatment of IH .Unlike Prednisolone, IL Dexamethasone is devoid of systemic side effects. J. Paediatr. Surg. Bangladesh 5 (1): 12-19, 2014 (January)","PeriodicalId":137868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Paediatric Surgeons of Bangladesh","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Paediatric Surgeons of Bangladesh","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3329/JPSB.V5I1.23884","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background : Infantile Hemangioma (IH) is one of the most common childhood neoplasm. Current treatments for children with endangering Infantile Hemangioma are limited, and include primarily oral corticosteroid which has many systemic adverse effects. Furthermore, approximately one third of IH does not respond to oral steroids, prompting active investigations for new treatments. Objective: To compare the efficacy, side effects, and influencing factors of oral Prednisolone and intralesional Dexamethasone (IL) in treatment of IH and thus to find out an effective, cheap and safe modality of treatment for this anomaly. Materials and Methods : This study was carried out on 48 patients of IH with the age range from 1 day to 12 years. Group A (n 1 =26) patients were treated by oral Prednisolone and group B (n 2 =22) patients were treated by IL Dexamethasone .Periorbital Hemangioma and IH >54 cubic centimeter were excluded. Therapeutic response of Prednisolone and Dexamethasone was graded as excellent, good, poor and no response. We monitored volume of the lesion and its color change to evaluate the response to treatment. Results: Overall therapeutic responses were 69.2% in Group A and 68.2% in group B. Side effects were noted in 65.4% patient of group A and 36.4% patient of group B. In group A, the commonest (38.5%) side effect was excessive weight gain with cushingoid facies and in group B, commonest (27.3%) side effect was ulceration at injection site. Side effects were more in children of group A. Range of treatment was 4-20 weeks in group A and in group B, it was 4-24 weeks. Conclusion : IL Dexamethasone is effective as oral Prednisolone for treatment of IH .Unlike Prednisolone, IL Dexamethasone is devoid of systemic side effects. J. Paediatr. Surg. Bangladesh 5 (1): 12-19, 2014 (January)
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
地塞米松与泼尼松隆治疗婴幼儿血管瘤的比较研究
背景:婴幼儿血管瘤是儿童最常见的肿瘤之一。目前对儿童危险血管瘤的治疗是有限的,主要包括口服皮质类固醇,这有许多全身不良反应。此外,大约三分之一的IH对口服类固醇没有反应,促使积极研究新的治疗方法。目的:比较口服强的松龙与局部地塞米松治疗IH的疗效、毒副作用及影响因素,探索有效、廉价、安全的治疗IH的方法。材料与方法:本研究纳入48例IH患者,年龄从1天到12岁不等。A组(n 1 =26)口服强的松龙治疗,B组(n 2 =22)口服地塞米松治疗,排除眼眶周围血管瘤和ihbb0 54立方厘米。强的松和地塞米松的疗效分为优、良、差和无疗效。我们监测病变的体积和颜色变化来评估对治疗的反应。结果:A组和B组的总有效率分别为69.2%和68.2%。A组和B组的副作用发生率分别为65.4%和36.4%。A组中最常见的副作用为库欣样相体重过度增加(38.5%),B组中最常见的副作用为注射部位溃疡(27.3%)。A组患儿副反应较多,治疗时间A组为4 ~ 20周,B组为4 ~ 24周。结论:地塞米松可作为口服强的松龙治疗IH,与强的松龙不同,地塞米松无全身副作用。j . Paediatr。孟加拉外科5 (1):12-19,2014 (1)
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Isolated congenital urethrocutaneous fistula: Two case reports Comparison between tubularisation of an intact and laterally augmented urethral plate urethroplasty and tubularised incised plate (TIP) urethroplasty for hypospadias repair The need for practice enhancements and parental empowerment during their child’s day surgery process: A pilot study Management of paediatric surgical patients during the COVID-19 pandemic: Our challenges The risk factors of gall stone formation in children
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1