A Case of Hypersensitivity Syndrome to Both Vancomycin and Teicoplanin

Drug hypersensitivity syndrome to both vancomycin and teicoplanin has not been previously reported. We describe here a 50-yr-old male patient with vertebral osteomyelitis and epidural abscess who developed hypersensitivity syndrome to both vancomycin and teicoplanin. Skin rash, fever, eosinophilia, interstitial pneumonitis, and interstitial nephritis developed following the administration of each drug, and resolved after withdrawing the drugs and treating with high dose corticosteroids. The vertebral osteomyelitis was successfully treated with 6-week course of linezolid without further complications. Skin patch tests for vancomycin and teicoplanin was done 2 months after the recovery; a weak positive result for vancomycin (10% aq.,+at D2 and +at D4 with erythema and vesicles; ICDRG scale), and a doubtful result for teicoplanin (4% aq.-at D2 and±at D4 with macular erythema; ICDRG scale). We present this case to alert clinicians to the hypersensitivity syndrome that can result from vancomycin and teicoplanin, with possible cross-reactivity, which could potentially be life-threatening

Oval Domes: History, Geometry and Mechanics

An oval dome may be defined as a dome whose plan or profile (or both) has an oval form. The word Aoval@ comes from the latin Aovum@, egg. Then, an oval dome has an egg-shaped geometry. The first buildings with oval plans were built without a predetermined form, just trying to close an space in the most economical form. Eventually, the geometry was defined by using arcs of circle with common tangents in the points of change of curvature. Later the oval acquired a more regular form with two axis of symmetry. Therefore, an “oval” may be defined as an egg-shaped form, doubly symmetric, constructed with arcs of circle; an oval needs a minimum of four centres, but it is possible also to build polycentric ovals. The above definition corresponds with the origin and the use of oval forms in building and may be applied without problem until, say, the XVIIIth century. Since then, the teaching of conics in the elementary courses of geometry made the cultivated people to define the oval as an approximation to the ellipse, an “imperfect ellipse”: an oval was, then, a curve formed with arcs of circles which tries to approximate to the ellipse of the same axes. As we shall see, the ellipse has very rarely been used in building. Finally, in modern geometrical textbooks an oval is defined as a smooth closed convex curve, a more general definition which embraces the two previous, but which is of no particular use in the study of the employment of oval forms in building. The present paper contains the following parts: 1) an outline the origin and application of the oval in historical architecture; 2) a discussion of the spatial geometry of oval domes, i. e., the different methods employed to trace them; 3) a brief exposition of the mechanics of oval arches and domes; and 4) a final discussion of the role of Geometry in oval arch and dome design

Causes and Treatment Outcomes of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and Toxic Epidermal Necrolysis in 82 Adult Patients

original article korean j intern med 2012;27:203-21

Automaticity in sequence-space synaesthesia: a critical appraisal of the evidence

For many people, thinking about certain types of common sequence - for example calendar units or numerals - elicits a vivid experience that the sequence members occupy spatial locations which are in turn part of a larger spatial pattern of sequence members. Recent research on these visuospatial experiences has usually considered them to be a variety of synaesthesia, and many studies have argued that this sequence-space synaesthesia is an automatic process, consistent with a traditional view that automaticity is a key property of synaesthesia. In this review we present a critical discussion of data from the three main paradigms that have been used to argue for automaticity in sequence-space synaesthesia, namely SNARC-like effects (Spatial-Numerical-Association-of-Response-Codes), spatial cueing, and perceptual incongruity effects. We suggest that previous studies have been too imprecise in specifying which type of automaticity is implicated. Moreover, mirroring previous challenges to automaticity in other types of synaesthesia, we conclude that existing data are at best ambiguous regarding the automaticity of sequence-space synaesthesia, and may even be more consistent with the effects of controlled (i.e., non-automatic) processes. This lack of strong evidence for automaticity reduces the temptation to seek explanations of sequence-space synaesthesia in terms of processes mediated by qualitatively abnormal brain organization or mechanisms. Instead, more parsimonious explanations in terms of extensively rehearsed associations, established for example via normal processes of visuospatial imagery, are convergent with arguments that synaesthetic phenomena are on a continuum with normal cognition. (c) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved

Processing Ordinality and Quantity: The Case of Developmental Dyscalculia

In contrast to quantity processing, up to date, the nature of ordinality has received little attention from researchers despite the fact that both quantity and ordinality are embodied in numerical information. Here we ask if there are two separate core systems that lie at the foundations of numerical cognition: (1) the traditionally and well accepted numerical magnitude system but also (2) core system for representing ordinal information. We report two novel experiments of ordinal processing that explored the relation between ordinal and numerical information processing in typically developing adults and adults with developmental dyscalculia (DD). Participants made “ordered” or “non-ordered” judgments about 3 groups of dots (non-symbolic numerical stimuli; in Experiment 1) and 3 numbers (symbolic task: Experiment 2). In contrast to previous findings and arguments about quantity deficit in DD participants, when quantity and ordinality are dissociated (as in the current tasks), DD participants exhibited a normal ratio effect in the non-symbolic ordinal task. They did not show, however, the ordinality effect. Ordinality effect in DD appeared only when area and density were randomized, but only in the descending direction. In the symbolic task, the ordinality effect was modulated by ratio and direction in both groups. These findings suggest that there might be two separate cognitive representations of ordinal and quantity information and that linguistic knowledge may facilitate estimation of ordinal information