Seroprevalence of Helicobacter pylori infection among children of low socioeconomic level in São Paulo

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Helicobacter pylori infection is mainly acquired during childhood, and is associated with significant morbidity in adults. The aim here was to evaluate the seroprevalence and risk factors of H. pylori infection among children of low socioeconomic level attended at a public hospital in São Paulo, Brazil. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional study, among patients attended at an outpatient clinic. METHODS: 326 children were evaluated (150 boys and 176 girls; mean age 6.82 ± 4.07 years) in a cross-sectional study. Patients with chronic diseases or previous H. pylori treatment, and those whose participation was not permitted by the adult responsible for the child, were excluded. The adults answered a demographic questionnaire and blood samples were collected. The serological test used was Cobas Core II, a second-generation test. Titers > 5 U/ml were considered positive. RESULTS: H. pylori infection was diagnosed in 116 children (35.6%). Infected children were older than uninfected children (7.77 ± 4.08 years versus 5.59 ± 3.86 years; p < 0.0001). The seroprevalence increased from 20.8% among children aged two to four years, to 58.3% among those older than 12 years. There were no significant relationships between seropositivity and gender, color, breastfeeding, number of people in the home, number of rooms, bed sharing, living in a shantytown, maternal educational level, family income or nutritional status. In multivariate analysis, the only variable significantly associated with H. pylori seropositivity was age. CONCLUSION: Infection had intermediate prevalence in the study population, and age was associated with higher prevalence

Avaliação da lidocaína tópica como pré-medicação para a endoscopia digestiva alta em crianças Evaluation of topical lidocaine spray as premedication to upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in children

OBJETIVO: Avaliar a eficácia da lidocaína spray tópica como droga adjuvante na sedação e analgesia de crianças e adolescentes para endoscopia digestiva. MÉTODOS: Foram incluídos 80 pacientes (49 femininos e 31 masculinos, idade média 12±3 anos), 40 no grupo placebo e 40 no grupo lidocaína. Os pacientes foram alocados aleatoriamente e um paciente de cada grupo foi excluído. Lidocaína a 10% ou placebo (ácido tânico 0,5%) aerossol (dois jatos) foram aplicados na orofaringe antes da infusão de propofol. Os pacientes foram monitorizados durante o procedimento e após, sendo respondido questionário para avaliar odinofagia e a pré-medicação. O desfecho primário foi a dose de propofol empregada, enquanto os desfechos secundários foram incidência de complicações, tempo de sala e duração do procedimento. RESULTADOS: Não houve diferenças entre os grupos quanto à idade, sexo e indicação da endoscopia. A dose de propofol empregada não foi diferente nos dois grupos (grupo placebo 3,1±1,1 e grupo lidocaína 2,9±1,3mg/kg; p=0,69), mesmo quando considerada a dose bruta (p=0,33). No entanto, o tempo de sala médio foi maior no grupo placebo do que no lidocaína (23±7 versus 20±5 minutos; IC95% da diferença: 0,47-5,89 minutos, p=0,02). Não houve diferenças entre os grupos quanto à duração do procedimento, incidência de complicações e aceitação pelo paciente. CONCLUSÕES: O emprego de medicação tópica anestésica em endoscopia reduz o tempo de sala sem aumentar a incidência de efeitos adversos (NCT00521703).<br>OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of topical lidocaine as an adjuvant drug to sedatives in children and adolescents undergoing digestive endoscopies. METHODS: 80 patients (49 females and 31 males, 12±3 years old) were randomly allocated into placebo (n=40) or lidocaine group (n=40). One patient was excluded from each group after allocation. Two puffs of either 10% lidocaine or placebo (tannic acid 0.5%) were sprayed into the oropharynx before the infusion of propofol. Patients were monitored during the procedure and answered a questionnaire after the procedure to evaluate sore throat and the medicine used as pre-medication. The primary outcome measure was propofol dose. Time spent in the procedure room, in the procedure and the incidence of complications were secondary outcome measures. RESULTS: Demographic data (age, sex and endoscopy indication) were evenly distributed in each group. The dose of propofol was not different between patients and controls (placebo group 3.1±1.1 and lidocaine group 2.9±1.3mg/kg; p=0.69), even considering the total dose (p=0.33). The time spent in the procedure room was longer for the placebo group than for the lidocaine group (23±7 versus 20±5 minutes; 95%CI of the difference: 0.47-5.89 minutes, p=0.02). There was no difference between groups regarding procedure duration, complications incidence and tolerability. CONCLUSIONS: Topic anesthetic medication reduces the time spent in the procedure room without increasing the incidence of side effects (NCT00521703)