ArticleThe American journal of case reports2021
Iodine Contrast Complex Rash Responding to Topical Steroids: A Case Report.
Article in The American journal of case reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND Iodine contrast allergy can cause acute and delayed allergic reactions. Just like any other sensitivity reaction, the severity can vary from mild to moderate skin manifestations such as erythematous rash to an even more severe presentation or life-threatening event, such as angioedema and anaphylaxis. CASE REPORT This case report discusses a patient who presented to our institution with a diffuse complex rash 2 days after undergoing CT scan imaging with intravenous iodine contrast injection. The rash started by being maculopapular in nature. Later on, the patient developed a purpuric and petechial pattern, and eventually, an acute exanthematous pustulosis rash was noticed. Several attempts to treat the patient with intravenous corticosteroids failed. Three days after admission (5 days after the rash started), topical steroids were used in place of parenteral steroids. The rash showed remarkable improvement in a very short time. The patient was diagnosed with delayed hypersensitivity IV iodine reaction, resistant to parenteral corticosteroids. The workup of such an extensive rash and odd presentation include several laboratory tests and skin testing to be able to rule out more serious differential diagnoses. CONCLUSIONS This case is unique as it enables us to show the importance of substituting topical management, more specifically, topical steroids that might even replace parenteral steroids, to our management in order to treat allergic reactions, especially in the presence of a rash.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.