ArticleArchives of dermatological research2025
A study on the clinical manifestations in lepidopterism.
Article in Archives of dermatological research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundExposure to hairs of caterpillars and moths are collectively termed as lepidopterism. Clinical manifestations include cutaneous presentation of localized stinging reaction with wheals or vesiculation, acute urticarial papules and plaques, ophthalmic, oropharyngeal involvement to severe life-threatening anaphylactic reactions with angioedema.
aimsIn this study we have determined the prevalence of various cutaneous, oropharyngeal and ophthalmic manifestations of lepidopterism at a tertiary health care center.
methodsAll clinically diagnosed cases of lepidopterism were recruited for the study. Characteristics such as age, sex, history of atopy, presence of direct contact with implicated moth/ caterpillar, symptoms and signs, eye, oropharyngeal involvement and systemic findings were noted. Severity of symptoms and signs were quantified according to the Investigator Global Assessment Scale for Dermatitis. Treatment response were noted. The data was analysed and results tabulated.
resultsOut of 32 patients 26 had direct exposure and 6 reported symptoms without direct exposure, Itch and pain, urticaria and excoriations were the most common findings, systemic symptoms though less in occurrence were noted. LIMITATIONS: There is lack of sufficient literature on these findings for comparative analysis.
conclusionCaterpillar dermatitis can occur without direct contact and can be treated completely thus an astute index of suspicion is essential for prompt diagnosis and treatment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39792279What 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.