暂无摘要。

The purpose of the study is to highlight clinical signs that are either suggestive of or against the diagnosis of AHEI to improve diagnosis and management. The medical records of children under 3 years old diagnosed with AHEI were retrospectively reviewed. Clinical data and photographs were reviewed by three independent experts, and the cases were classified as probable, doubtful, or unclear AHEI. Of the 69 cases of children diagnosed with AHEI included in 22 centers, 40 were classified as probable, 22 as doubtful, and 7 as unclear. The median age of patients with probable AHEI was 11 months [IQR 9-15], and they were in overall good condition (n = 33/40, 82.5%). The morphology of the purpura was targetoid in 75% of cases (n = 30/40) and ecchymotic in 70% of cases (n = 28/40) and affected mostly the legs (n = 39/40, 97%), the arms (n = 34/40, 85%), and the face (n = 33/40, 82.5%). Edema was observed in 95% of cases and affected mostly the hands (n = 36/38, 95%) and feet (n = 28/38, 74%). Pruritus was absent in all patients with probable AHEI and described for 6/21 with doubtful AHEI (29%). AHEI was the original diagnosis in only 24 patients (n = 24/40, 60%). The major differential diagnoses were purpura fulminans and urticaria multiforme.  Conclusion: AHEI, which the diagnosis is made on clinical findings, is often misdiagnosed. Purpuric lesions localized on the face/ears, arms/forearms, and thighs/legs with edema of the hands without pruritus in a young child with a good overall condition are highly suggestive of AHEI. What is Known: •Acute hemorrhagic edema of infancy (AHEI) is a cutaneous leukocytoclastic vasculitis affecting children under 3 years old. •Appropriate diagnosis is important to distinguish this benign disease from more serious diseases to avoid investigations and treatments, iatrogenic harm and unnecessary follow-up. What is New: •AHEI is an uncommon disorder often misdiagnosed by pediatricians and dermatologists. •Purpuric lesions localized on the face/ears, arms/forearms, and thighs/legs with edema of the hands without pruritus in an infant with a good overall condition are highly suggestive of AHEI.

The current studies focus on the association between COVID-19 and certain comorbidities. To the best of our knowledge, the association between severe COVID-19 and dermatologic comorbidities has not been reported yet. In this study, we aimed to describe the dermatologic comorbidities of patients with severe COVID-19 and compare it with the control group. Patients who have died at Uşak Training and Research Hospital due to COVID-19 and other diseases in the COVID-19 Intensive Care Units and Internal Medicine Intensive Care Units were recruited into the study. Two groups were compared with each other regarding the most common dermatologic comorbidities. A total of 198 patients including 111 patients with COVID-19 and 87 age and sex-matched patients with other diseases were enrolled in the study. The most common dermatologic comorbidities were pruritus (8.1%), eczema (6.3%), skin infections (3.6%), leukocytoclastic vasculitis (1.8%), and urticaria (0.9%) in the COVID-19 group while they were skin infections (9.2%), eczema (3.4%), pruritus (2.3%), and urticaria (1.1%) in the control group. None of patients in the control group had leukocytoclastic vasculitis. There were no significant differences between COVID-19 and control groups in terms of pruritus, eczema, skin infections, and urticaria (P values were .117, .517, .181, .505, and 1.000, respectively). In conclusion, although it is not statistically significant, it appears that pruritus and leukocytoclastic vasculitis are more common in severe COVID-19 patients. These cytokines-related diseases in the immuno-cutaneous systems may give some clues on the COVID-19 severity. Further studies are required to elucidate the relationship between the immuno-cutaneous system and COVID-19 severity.

BACKGROUND: Histopathologic vasculitis is often reported in periulcer specimens, but the frequency and clinical significance of this finding have not been evaluated.
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value, and positive predictive value of histopathologic vasculitis from the periulcer edge for detecting ulcers due to cutaneous vasculitis.
METHODS: We performed a retrospective chart review of patients with leg ulcers at a tertiary hospital between 2009 and 2016. Histopathologic slides were evaluated by 2 dermatopathologists who were blinded to the etiology of ulcer. Focal vasculitis was defined as involvement of fewer than 3 vessels.
RESULTS: Vasculitis at the periulcer edge was seen in 51.6% of the specimens (32 of 62). Of the specimens with histopathologic vasculitis, focal vasculitis was seen in the majority of specimens (71.9% [23 of 32]), whereas diffuse vasculitis was observed in 28.1% (9 of 32). Periulcer vasculitis yielded a high sensitivity (100% [95% confidence interval, 29%-100%]). Furthermore, the specificity was low (50.9% [95% confidence interval, 38.1%-63.6%]) for detecting vasculitis-induced ulcers.
CONCLUSIONS: Small number of vasculitis-induced ulcers.
CONCLUSIONS: Focal vasculitis from the periulcer edge is a nonspecific finding and provides little diagnostic value in determining the etiology of lower leg ulcers. Emphasis should be placed on the combination of clinical history and examination, histology, and laboratory findings when diagnosing ulcers.

OBJECTIVE: For many physicians, palpable purpura is synonymous with vasculitis. However, a skin biopsy is almost always performed in common clinical practice in order to confirm the diagnosis. The aim of our study was to assess whether palpable purpura is always indicative of an inflammatory infiltrate in a vessel wall.
METHODS: Eighty-seven patients were included in this prospective monocentric study, 45 of whom were presenting a palpable purpura. Patients were classified in two categories: \"leukocytoclastic vasculitis\" or \"other diagnosis\". The clinical and histopathological features of patients with a palpable purpura were studied.
RESULTS: The mean age of patients presenting a palpable purpura was 69 years. There were 26 men and 19 women. Of the 43 patients biopsied, 37 were included in the vasculitis group. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value for a diagnosis of vasculitis in patients with palpable purpura were respectively 82, 65, 86 and 58 %. The Odds ratio was 8.48 (95 % CI, 2.52-31.80; P<0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Most of the palpable purpuras examined were indeed related to leukocytoclastic vasculitis. In the remaining cases, biopsy did not contribute to the diagnosis since it only showed purpura without vessel wall inflammation. In our opinion, a skin biopsy is thus not essential where the clinical presentation is typical.