BACKGROUND: There is no agreement as to whether papular acrodermatitis of childhood caused by hepatitis B virus can be differentiated from other papulovesicular acrolocated syndromes. OBJECTIVE: We attempted to establish whether such differentiation is possible comparing histories, signs, and symptoms of all patients who have been previously diagnosed as having papular acrodermatitis of childhood or papulovesicular acrolocated syndromes. METHODS: Files of 308 patients hospitalized in the past three decades were studied. Photographs were examined by a panel of experts to determine whether it was possible to distinguish between papular acrodermatitis of childhood and papulovesicular acrolocated syndromes solely on the basis of cutaneous signs. RESULTS: The retrospective analysis confirmed a significant overlapping of the two types of the disease. The blind survey of photographs of the patients revealed that a distinction between the forms was not clinically possible. CONCLUSION: Acrodermatitis is a self-limiting cutaneous response to different viruses; clinical differences are probably due to individual characteristics of each patient rather than the causative virus.
BACKGROUND: There is no agreement as to whether papular acrodermatitis of childhood caused by hepatitis B virus can be differentiated from other papulovesicular acrolocated syndromes. OBJECTIVE: We attempted to establish whether such differentiation is possible comparing histories, signs, and symptoms of all patients who have been previously diagnosed as having papular acrodermatitis of childhood or papulovesicular acrolocated syndromes. METHODS: Files of 308 patients hospitalized in the past three decades were studied. Photographs were examined by a panel of experts to determine whether it was possible to distinguish between papular acrodermatitis of childhood and papulovesicular acrolocated syndromes solely on the basis of cutaneous signs. RESULTS: The retrospective analysis confirmed a significant overlapping of the two types of the disease. The blind survey of photographs of the patients revealed that a distinction between the forms was not clinically possible. CONCLUSION:Acrodermatitis is a self-limiting cutaneous response to different viruses; clinical differences are probably due to individual characteristics of each patient rather than the causative virus.
Authors: Aline Pantano Marcassi; Christiane Affonso de Donato Piazza; Maria Bandeira de Melo Paiva Seize; Silmara da Costa Pereira Cestari Journal: An Bras Dermatol Date: 2018-03 Impact factor: 1.896