Search

Une femme de 63 ans rapporte avoir acheté une « pierre noire » pour se protéger de la Covid-19 à la suite de conseils trouvés sur des réseaux sociaux. Dans les 24 heures qui suivent l'absorption d'une cuillère à soupe d'un mélange de « pierre » avec du miel, apparaissent des myalgies puis une altération de l'état général qui la conduit à consulter aux urgences après 5 jours. L'examen clinique est sans autre particularité alors que le bilan biologique rapporte une insuffisance rénale aiguë et une rhabdomyolyse. L'évolution est marquée par une aggravation de l'insuffisance rénale nécessitant plusieurs séances d'hémodialyse. Les circonstances d'apparition des symptômes associées à la consommation de la « pierre » font suspecter une origine toxique. Un tube de sang et la « pierre » sont adressés au Laboratoire de toxicologie biologique pour analyses. La « pierre » friable, noire en surface, blanche en interne, est soluble dans les alcools et peu soluble dans l'eau. L'analyse par plasma à couplage inductif - spectrométrie de masse - ne retrouve ni éléments métalliques, ni métalloïdes. L'analyse par chromatographie gazeuse couplée à la spectrométrie de masse met en évidence un pic identifié comme de la paraphénylènediamine (PPD). Une analyse par spectroscopie UV permet d'estimer la pureté de la « pierre » à plus de 99 %. La PPD utilisée comme teinture capillaire noire ou adjuvant du henné est responsable d'intoxications graves, majoritairement volontaires, caractérisées par une détresse respiratoire, une rhabdomyolyse associée à des douleurs musculaires et à une insuffisance rénale. À l'exception de la détresse respiratoire, notre patiente a présenté tous les signes cliniques de l'intoxication. L'absence de détection de la PPD dans le plasma s'explique tant par la mise en œuvre de méthodes non adaptées à la détection de ce type de composés chimiques, que par le délai écoulé depuis la consommation de la « pierre ».

Diabetic nephropathy is usually a presumptive diagnosis based on clinical and biological evidence. Renal biopsies are performed in diabetic patients with atypical findings evoking non-diabetic renal disease who could benefit from specific therapies. French speaking nephrologists were asked which criteria they retain to indicate renal biopsy in patients with type 2 diabetes and albuminuria>0.5g/day or equivalent through an online anonymous questionnaire. Among the suggested criteria were absence of diabetic retinopathy, hematuria, rapid decrease in GFR, short diabetes duration or rapid raise of proteinuria. 188 people answered the poll among whom interns (12%), fellows (13%), university hospital practitioners (26%), general hospital practitioners (24%), practitioners in a non-profit organization (13%), practitioners on private activity (10%), multi-modal practitioners (3%) and people without clinical activity (2%). Increasing proteinuria was retained as an indication criterion for renal biopsy by 51% of respondents, nephrotic syndrome by 56% of respondents, absence of diabetic retinopathy by 57% of respondents, short diabetes duration by 65% of respondents, rapid GFR decline by 75% of respondents and hematuria by 78% of respondents. These data highlight the high diversity of opinions on this topic and their discrepancies with guidelines and current literature regarding the association between non-diabetic renal disease and clinical and biological features. The lack of adhesion of nephrologists to guidelines was especially noteworthy regarding the absence of diabetic retinopathy. These results emphasize the need for studies focusing on biopsy indication criteria in patients with type 2 diabetes., (Copyright © 2019 Société francophone de néphrologie, dialyse et transplantation. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)

Systemic lupus erythematosus is the most characteristic of auto-immune disorders that can lead to tissue damage in many organs, including kidney. Lupus nephritis occurs in 10 to 40% of lupus patients. Its clinical hallmark is the appearance of a proteinuria as soon as a 0.5 g/g or 0.5 g/d threshold, which calls for a renal histological evaluation in order to determine the lupus nephritis severity and the need for specific therapy. More than half of renal biopsies lead to the diagnosis of active lupus nephritis-class III or class IV A according to the ISN/RPS classification-that are the most severe in regards to renal prognosis and mortality. Their treatment aims to their clinical remission and to the prevention of relapse with minimal adverse effects for eventually the preservation of renal function, the prevention of other irreversible damage, and the reduction of risk of death. The remission is obtained through induction therapies of which the association of high dose steroids and cyclophosphamide is the most experienced. When this association must be challenged by the prevention of side-effect, in particular infertility, mycophenolate can be given instead of cyclophosphamide. Maintenance therapy, for the prevention of relapse, consists in mycophenolate or in azathioprine, mycophenolate being the most efficient however associated with a high risk of teratogenicity. Withdrawal of maintenance therapy is possible after two to three years in absence of high risk factors of relapse of lupus nephritis, however a reliable assessment of the risk of relapse is still lacking. Only pure membranous lupus nephritis (pure class V) associated with high level proteinuria requires specific therapies that usually associates steroids and an immunosuppressive drug. However, their choice hierarchy and even the use of less immunosuppressive strategies remain to be determined in terms of benefice over risk ratios. In spite of its trigger effect on lupus activity, pregnancy can be safe and successful if scheduled in the lowest risk periods with close multidisciplinary monitoring before, during and after. When necessary, renal replacement therapy does not require specific adaptation, renal transplantation is the best option when possible, as early as possible., (Copyright © 2018 Société francophone de néphrologie, dialyse et transplantation. Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.)