Lactante de 9 meses con convulsiones

- Datos Clínicos. - Antecedentes personales. - Enfermedad actual. - Aciduria Glutárica tipo I

Evaluación del progreso pondo-estatural en niños alimentados en forma exclusiva con leche materna o leche de vaca

Se analizaron 215 niños alimentados en forma exclusiva y desde el nacimiento con un solo tipo de leche. El Grupo I (GI) correspondió a 124 niños alimentados con leche materna y el Grupo II (GII) a 91 niños que recibieron fórmulas de leche de vaca. Se observó que el GI presentó menor cantidad de episodios de infecciones gastrointestinales agudas (P: 0,02). No se hallaron diferencias significativas (P: 0,12) en relación a los procesos infecciosos agudos de las vías respiratorias. En el análisis de peso y talla a los 6 meses de vida se encontró una diferencia significativa con respecto al peso en el GII (P: 0,041), pero no en relación a la talla (P: 0,25). A los 12 meses de vida la diferencias de peso (P: 0,003) y talla (P: 0,004) fueron altamente significativas, siendo mayores en los niños del GII. Los resultados indican que los niños del GI presentaron menor número de infecciones del tracto digestivo que los del GII, pero estos últimos ganaron mayor peso y talla. Estos datos parecen indicar que una ganancia de peso y talla mayor no siempre se acompaña de menor número de episodios infecciosos.We analyzed 215 children receiving one type of milk only since birth. Group I (GI) included 124 children receiving breast feeding and Group II (GII) 91 children fed with cow milk formulas. GI presented less acute gastrointestinal infection episodes (P: 0.02). There was no significative difference (P: 0.12) in the incidence of acute respiratory infection episodes between both groups. In the analysis of weight and height at 6 months of age there was a significative difference of weight in favor of GII (P: 0.041) but this was not so for height (P: 0.25). At age 12 months the differences in weight (P: 0,003) and height (P: 0.004) were highly significative in favor of children of GII. These results indicate that GI children developed less number of digestive tract infections and that GII children gained higher weight and height. The data seem to show that gaining weight and height not necessarily associates with less number of infectious episodes

The Argentinian Spanish version of the Juvenile Arthritis Multidimensional Assessment Report (JAMAR)

The Juvenile Arthritis Multidimensional Assessment Report (JAMAR) is a new parent/patient reported outcome measure that enables a thorough assessment of the disease status in children with juvenile idiopathic arthritis (JIA). We report the results of the cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the parent and patient versions of the JAMAR in the Argentinian Spanish language. The reading comprehension of the questionnaire was tested in 10 JIA parents and patients. Each participating centre was asked to collect demographic, clinical data and the JAMAR in 100 consecutive JIA patients or all consecutive patients seen in a 6-month period and to administer the JAMAR to 100 healthy children and their parents. The statistical validation phase explored descriptive statistics and the psychometric issues of the JAMAR: the three Likert assumptions, floor/ceiling effects, internal consistency, Cronbach\u2019s alpha, interscale correlations, test\u2013retest reliability, and construct validity (convergent and discriminant validity). A total of 373 JIA patients (23.1% systemic, 30.8% oligoarticular, 28.1% RF negative polyarthritis, 18% other categories) and 100 healthy children were enrolled in five centres. The JAMAR components discriminated well healthy subjects from JIA patients. Notably, there was no significant difference between healthy subjects and their affected peers in the school-related item. All JAMAR components revealed good psychometric performances. In conclusion, the Argentinian Spanish version of the JAMAR is a valid tool for the assessment of children with JIA and is suitable for use both in routine clinical practice and clinical research

Multicentre observational study on multisystem inflammatory syndrome related to COVID-19 in Argentina

Background: The impact of the pediatric inflammatory multisystem syndrome temporally associated with SARS-CoV-2 (PIMS-TS) in low- and middle-income countries remains poorly understood. Our aim was to understand the characteristics and outcomes of PIMS-TS in Argentina. Methods: This observational, prospective, and retrospective multicenter study enrolled patients younger than 18 years-old manifesting PIMS-TS, Kawasaki disease (KD) or Kawasaki shock syndrome (KSS) between March 2020 and May 2021. Patients were followed-up until hospital discharge or death (one case). The primary outcome was pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) admission. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify variables predicting PICU admission. Results: Eighty-one percent, 82%, and 14% of the 176 enrolled patients fulfilled the suspect case criteria for PIMS-TS, KD, and KSS, respectively. Temporal association with SARS-CoV-2 was confirmed in 85% of the patients and 38% were admitted to the PICU. The more common clinical manifestations were fever, abdominal pain, rash, and conjunctival injection. Lymphopenia was more common among PICU-admitted patients (87% vs. 51%, p < 0.0001), who also showed a lower platelet count and higher plasmatic levels of inflammatory and cardiac markers. Mitral valve insufficiency, left ventricular wall motion alterations, pericardial effusion, and coronary artery alterations were observed in 30%, 30%, 19.8%, and 18.6% of the patients, respectively. Days to initiation of treatment, rash, lymphopenia, and low platelet count were significant independent contributions to PICU admission. Conclusion: Rates of severe outcomes of PIMS-TS in the present study agreed with those observed in high-income countries. Together with other published studies, this work helps clinicians to better understand this novel clinical entity.Fil: Vainstein, Eduardo. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños "Ricardo Gutiérrez"; ArgentinaFil: Baleani, Silvia. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños "Ricardo Gutiérrez"; ArgentinaFil: Urrutia, Luis. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital de Pediatría "Juan P. Garrahan"; ArgentinaFil: Affranchino, Nicolás. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital de Pediatría "Juan P. Garrahan"; ArgentinaFil: Ackerman, Judith. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños Pedro Elizalde (ex Casa Cuna); ArgentinaFil: Cazalas, Mariana. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños "Ricardo Gutiérrez"; ArgentinaFil: Goldsman, Alejandro. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños "Ricardo Gutiérrez"; ArgentinaFil: Sardella, Angela. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños "Ricardo Gutiérrez"; ArgentinaFil: Tolin, Ana Laura. Gobierno de la Provincia de Mendoza. Hospital Pediátrico Humberto Notti; ArgentinaFil: Goldaracena, Pablo. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Ministerio de Salud. Hospital de Niños "Sor María Ludovica" de La Plata; ArgentinaFil: Fabi, Mariana. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Ministerio de Salud. Hospital de Niños "Sor María Ludovica" de La Plata; ArgentinaFil: Cosentino, Mariana. Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires; ArgentinaFil: Magliola, Ricardo. Hospital Británico de Buenos Aires; ArgentinaFil: Roggiero, Gustavo. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Ministerio de Salud. Hospital Alta Complejidad en Red El Cruce Dr. Néstor Carlos Kirchner Samic; ArgentinaFil: Manso, Paula. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Ministerio de Salud. Hospital Alta Complejidad en Red El Cruce Dr. Néstor Carlos Kirchner Samic; ArgentinaFil: Triguy, Jésica. Gobierno de la Provincia de Mendoza. Hospital Pediátrico Humberto Notti; ArgentinaFil: Ballester, Celeste. Gobierno de la Provincia de Mendoza. Hospital Pediátrico Humberto Notti; ArgentinaFil: Cervetto, Vanesa. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños Pedro Elizalde (ex Casa Cuna); ArgentinaFil: Vaccarello, María. Sanatorio de la Trinidad; ArgentinaFil: De Carli, Domingo Norberto. Clínica del Niño de Quilmes; ArgentinaFil: De Carli, Maria Estela. Clínica del Niño de Quilmes; ArgentinaFil: Ciotti, Ana Laura. Hospital Nacional Profesor Alejandro Posadas; ArgentinaFil: Sicurello, María Irene. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital General de Niños "Ricardo Gutiérrez"; ArgentinaFil: Rios Leiva, Cecilia. Provincia de Buenos Aires. Ministerio de Salud. Hospital Interzonal de Agudos "Eva Perón"; ArgentinaFil: Villalba, Claudia. Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires. Hospital de Pediatría "Juan P. Garrahan"; ArgentinaFil: Hortas, María. Sanatorio de la Trinidad; ArgentinaFil: Peña, Sonia. Gobierno de la Provincia de Mendoza. Hospital Pediátrico Humberto Notti; ArgentinaFil: González, Gabriela. Gobierno de la Provincia de Mendoza. Hospital Pediátrico Humberto Notti; ArgentinaFil: Zold, Camila Lidia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Houssay. Instituto de Fisiología y Biofísica Bernardo Houssay. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Fisiología y Biofísica Bernardo Houssay; ArgentinaFil: Murer, Mario Gustavo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Oficina de Coordinación Administrativa Houssay. Instituto de Fisiología y Biofísica Bernardo Houssay. Universidad de Buenos Aires. Facultad de Medicina. Instituto de Fisiología y Biofísica Bernardo Houssay; ArgentinaFil: Grippo, M.. No especifíca;Fil: Vázquez, H.. No especifíca;Fil: Morós, C.. No especifíca;Fil: Di Santo, M.. No especifíca;Fil: Villa, A.. No especifíca;Fil: Lazota, P.. No especifíca;Fil: Foti, M.. No especifíca;Fil: Napoli, N.. No especifíca;Fil: Katsikas, M. M.. No especifíca;Fil: Tonello, L.. No especifíca;Fil: Peña, J.. No especifíca;Fil: Etcheverry, M.. No especifíca;Fil: Iglesias, D.. No especifíca;Fil: Alcalde, A. L.. No especifíca;Fil: Bruera, M.J.. No especifíca;Fil: Bruzzo, V.. No especifíca;Fil: Giordano, P.. No especifíca;Fil: Pena Acero, F.. No especifíca;Fil: Netri Pelandi, G.. No especifíca;Fil: Pastaro, D.. No especifíca;Fil: Bleiz, J.. No especifíca;Fil: Rodríguez, M. F.. No especifíca;Fil: Laghezza, L.. No especifíca;Fil: Molina, M. B.. No especifíca;Fil: Patynok, N.. No especifíca;Fil: Chatelain, M. S.. No especifíca;Fil: Aguilar, M. J.. No especifíca;Fil: Gamboa, J.. No especifíca;Fil: Cervan, M.. No especifíca;Fil: Ruggeri, A.. No especifíca;Fil: Marinelli, I.. No especifíca;Fil: Checcacci, E.. No especifíca;Fil: Meregalli, C.. No especifíca;Fil: Damksy Barbosa, J.. No especifíca;Fil: Fernie, L.. No especifíca;Fil: Fernández, M. J.. No especifíca;Fil: Saenz Tejeira, M.M.. No especifíca;Fil: Cereigido, C.. No especifíca;Fil: Nunell, A.. No especifíca;Fil: Villar, D.. No especifíca;Fil: Mansilla, A. D.. No especifíca;Fil: Darduin, M. D.. No especifíca

Effects of ocean sprawl on ecological connectivity: impacts and solutions

The growing number of artificial structures in estuarine, coastal and marine environments is causing “ocean sprawl”. Artificial structures do not only modify marine and coastal ecosystems at the sites of their placement, but may also produce larger-scale impacts through their alteration of ecological connectivity - the movement of organisms, materials and energy between habitat units within seascapes. Despite the growing awareness of the capacity of ocean sprawl to influence ecological connectivity, we lack a comprehensive understanding of how artificial structures modify ecological connectivity in near- and off-shore environments, and when and where their effects on connectivity are greatest. We review the mechanisms by which ocean sprawl may modify ecological connectivity, including trophic connectivity associated with the flow of nutrients and resources. We also review demonstrated, inferred and likely ecological impacts of such changes to connectivity, at scales from genes to ecosystems, and potential strategies of management for mitigating these effects. Ocean sprawl may alter connectivity by: (1) creating barriers to the movement of some organisms and resources - by adding physical barriers or by modifying and fragmenting habitats; (2) introducing new structural material that acts as a conduit for the movement of other organisms or resources across the landscape; and (3) altering trophic connectivity. Changes to connectivity may, in turn, influence the genetic structure and size of populations, the distribution of species, and community structure and ecological functioning. Two main approaches to the assessment of ecological connectivity have been taken: (1) measurement of structural connectivity - the configuration of the landscape and habitat patches and their dynamics; and (2) measurement of functional connectivity - the response of organisms or particles to the landscape. Our review reveals the paucity of studies directly addressing the effects of artificial structures on ecological connectivity in the marine environment, particularly at large spatial and temporal scales. With the ongoing development of estuarine and marine environments, there is a pressing need for additional studies that quantify the effects of ocean sprawl on ecological connectivity. Understanding the mechanisms by which structures modify connectivity is essential if marine spatial planning and eco-engineering are to be effectively utilised to minimise impacts

Conditional cash transfer programmes: the recent experience in Latin America and the Caribbean

Includes BibliographySpanish version available at the LibraryForeword Alicia BárcenaThis document summarizes experience with conditional cash transfer or "co-responsibility" (CCT) programmes in Latin America and the Caribbean, over a period lasting more than 15 years. During this time, CCTs have consolidated and spread through the region's various countries as a tool of choice for poverty-reduction policy. This document, which it is hoped will serve as a basis and input for discussion and progress in building social-protection systems premised on inclusion and universal rights, provides detailed information on the different components of CCTs. It also reviews their main characteristics in terms of the definition and registration of programme users, the targeting mechanisms used, the various types of benefits provided, and the conditionalities attached to them. It then analyses the historical trend of the indicators of CCT investment and coverage, and the information available 8 ECLAC on their effects in different domains. Lastly, it makes an assessment of the experience and the main challenges that these programmes pose in terms of their sustainability, legal framework, accountability, participation, institutionality and inter-sectoral characteristics

Immunoglobulin, glucocorticoid, or combination therapy for multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children: a propensity-weighted cohort study

Background: Multisystem inflammatory syndrome in children (MIS-C), a hyperinflammatory condition associated with SARS-CoV-2 infection, has emerged as a serious illness in children worldwide. Immunoglobulin or glucocorticoids, or both, are currently recommended treatments. Methods: The Best Available Treatment Study evaluated immunomodulatory treatments for MIS-C in an international observational cohort. Analysis of the first 614 patients was previously reported. In this propensity-weighted cohort study, clinical and outcome data from children with suspected or proven MIS-C were collected onto a web-based Research Electronic Data Capture database. After excluding neonates and incomplete or duplicate records, inverse probability weighting was used to compare primary treatments with intravenous immunoglobulin, intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, or glucocorticoids alone, using intravenous immunoglobulin as the reference treatment. Primary outcomes were a composite of inotropic or ventilator support from the second day after treatment initiation, or death, and time to improvement on an ordinal clinical severity scale. Secondary outcomes included treatment escalation, clinical deterioration, fever, and coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution. This study is registered with the ISRCTN registry, ISRCTN69546370. Findings: We enrolled 2101 children (aged 0 months to 19 years) with clinically diagnosed MIS-C from 39 countries between June 14, 2020, and April 25, 2022, and, following exclusions, 2009 patients were included for analysis (median age 8·0 years [IQR 4·2–11·4], 1191 [59·3%] male and 818 [40·7%] female, and 825 [41·1%] White). 680 (33·8%) patients received primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin, 698 (34·7%) with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, 487 (24·2%) with glucocorticoids alone; 59 (2·9%) patients received other combinations, including biologicals, and 85 (4·2%) patients received no immunomodulators. There were no significant differences between treatments for primary outcomes for the 1586 patients with complete baseline and outcome data that were considered for primary analysis. Adjusted odds ratios for ventilation, inotropic support, or death were 1·09 (95% CI 0·75–1·58; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids and 0·93 (0·58–1·47; corrected p value=1·00) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Adjusted average hazard ratios for time to improvement were 1·04 (95% CI 0·91–1·20; corrected p value=1·00) for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids, and 0·84 (0·70–1·00; corrected p value=0·22) for glucocorticoids alone, versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Treatment escalation was less frequent for intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids (OR 0·15 [95% CI 0·11–0·20]; p<0·0001) and glucocorticoids alone (0·68 [0·50–0·93]; p=0·014) versus intravenous immunoglobulin alone. Persistent fever (from day 2 onward) was less common with intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids compared with either intravenous immunoglobulin alone (OR 0·50 [95% CI 0·38–0·67]; p<0·0001) or glucocorticoids alone (0·63 [0·45–0·88]; p=0·0058). Coronary artery aneurysm occurrence and resolution did not differ significantly between treatment groups. Interpretation: Recovery rates, including occurrence and resolution of coronary artery aneurysms, were similar for primary treatment with intravenous immunoglobulin when compared to glucocorticoids or intravenous immunoglobulin plus glucocorticoids. Initial treatment with glucocorticoids appears to be a safe alternative to immunoglobulin or combined therapy, and might be advantageous in view of the cost and limited availability of intravenous immunoglobulin in many countries. Funding: Imperial College London, the European Union's Horizon 2020, Wellcome Trust, the Medical Research Foundation, UK National Institute for Health and Care Research, and National Institutes of Health