Search

Carbon dioxide ablative fractional laser (CO2-AFL) therapy has not been widely adopted in pediatric burn care given limited outcomes literature and no established guidelines on laser treatment protocols. We present our experience to further elucidate the clinical role of CO2-AFL therapy for pediatric hypertrophic burn scars. We conducted a prospective cohort study of pediatric burn patients undergoing CO2-AFL treatment of hypertrophic, symptomatic burn scars at a tertiary care regional burn center during a 2-year period. Scars were assessed before each treatment using the Patient and Observer Scar Assessment Scale (POSAS), a validated, subjective, comprehensive scar assessment tool. We treated 49 pediatric patients for a total of 180 laser sessions. Burn severity was full thickness (63.6%) or deep partial thickness (47.7%). Observer-rated POSAS scores revealed statistically significant improvements in pigment, thickness, relief, pliability, and surface area after one treatment with continued improvement until the last laser session. Patient-rated POSAS revealed statistically significant improvements in color, stiffness, thickness, and irregularity after laser treatments. Total POSAS improved from 89.6 ± 17.5 to 76.6 ± 16.8 (P < .0001) after one treatment with further improvement to 69.2 ± 14.9 (P < .0001) at the final laser session. We found convincing evidence that CO2-AFL therapy improves hypertrophic burn scars on both patient- and observer-rated scales confirming statistical and clinical significance to both providers and families. These findings demonstrate that CO2-AFL can improve hypertrophic burn scars in pediatric patients providing a lower risk alternative to invasive therapies and a more immediate, efficacious alternative to more conservative scar treatments.

The COVID‐19 pandemic has caused significant shifts in patient care including a steep decline in ambulatory visits and a marked increase in the use of telemedicine. Infantile hemangiomas (IH) can require urgent evaluation and risk stratification to determine which infants need treatment and which can be managed with continued observation. For those requiring treatment, prompt initiation decreases morbidity and improves long‐term outcomes. The Hemangioma Investigator Group has created consensus recommendations for management of IH via telemedicine. FDA/EMA‐approved monitoring guidelines, clinical practice guidelines, and relevant, up‐to‐date publications regarding initiation and monitoring of beta‐blocker therapy were used to inform the recommendations. Clinical decision‐making guidelines about when telehealth is an appropriate alternative to in‐office visits, including medication initiation, dosage changes, and ongoing evaluation, are included. The importance of communication with caregivers in the context of telemedicine is discussed, and online resources for both hemangioma education and propranolol therapy are provided.

Importance Oral propranolol is widely considered to be first-line therapy for complicated infantile hemangioma, but its use in patients with PHACE (posterior fossa malformations, hemangioma, arterial anomalies, cardiac defects, eye anomalies) syndrome has been debated owing to concerns that the cardiovascular effects of the drug may increase the risk for arterial ischemic stroke. Objective To assess the incidence of adverse events among patients with PHACE syndrome receiving oral propranolol for infantile hemangioma. Design, Setting, and Participants This multicenter retrospective cohort study assessed the incidence of adverse events among 76 patients with PHACE syndrome receiving oral propranolol for infantile hemangioma at 11 tertiary care, academic pediatric dermatology practices. Medical records from January 1, 2010, through April 25, 2017, were reviewed. Exposures Patients received oral propranolol, 0.3 mg/kg/dose or more. Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome was the rate and severity of adverse events occurring throughout the course of treatment with oral propranolol, as documented in the medical records. Adverse events were graded from 1 to 5 using a scale derived from the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events and were considered to be serious if they were grade 3 or higher. Results A total of 76 patients (59 girls and 17 boys; median age at propranolol initiation, 56 days [range, 0-396 days]) met the inclusion criteria. There were no reports of serious adverse events (ie, stroke, transient ischemic attack, or cardiovascular events) during treatment with oral propranolol. A total of 46 nonserious adverse events were reported among 29 patients (38.2%); the most commonly reported nonserious adverse events were sleep disturbances and minor gastrointestinal tract and respiratory tract symptoms. In a comparison with 726 infants who received oral propranolol for hemangioma but did not meet criteria for PHACE syndrome, there was no significant difference in the rate of serious adverse events experienced during treatment (0 of 76 patients with PHACE syndrome and 3 of 726 patients without PHACE syndrome [0.4%]). Conclusions and Relevance This study found that oral propranolol was used to treat infantile hemangioma in 76 patients with PHACE syndrome and that no serious adverse events were experienced. These data provide support for the safety of oral propranolol in this patient population.

IMPORTANCE: Patients with somatic overgrowth commonly require surgical intervention to preserve function and improve cosmesis. To our knowledge no observation of scarring outcomes in this population has been published to date. OBJECTIVE: To observe the frequency of abnormal scarring in patients with somatic overgrowth and sequencing-verified mutations in the PIK3CA gene. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This retrospective study evaluated scarring outcomes in patients with PIK3CA-related overgrowth. Samples of affected tissue were sequenced between July 2015 and October 2016. Medical records from multiple large academic tertiary care centers were reviewed for surgical history and scar descriptions, and clinical photographs were assessed by 2 surgeons (J.N.J. and D.M.K.) to confirm abnormal scarring. Analysis of medical records and photographs was performed between April 2017 and June 2017 by a multidisciplinary team from dermatology, plastic surgery, orthopedic surgery, radiology, and genetics departments. All patients considered for the study were diagnosed with somatic overgrowth and previously had affected tissue sent for next-generation sequencing. Those with pathogenic PIK3CA variants and 1 or more prior surgical procedures were reviewed. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Presence of excessive scarring in patients with PIK3CA overgrowth. RESULTS: A total of 57 patients with segmental overgrowth syndromes were sequenced. Of the 57 patients, 25 (44%) had pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants in PIK3CA. Of those with pathogenic PIK3CA variants, 6 (24%) had past surgical procedures, all with preoperative and postoperative photographs. Of 6 patients with PIK3CA-related overgrowth and a history of 1 or more surgical procedure, 4 (67%) developed excessive scarring. The cohort with abnormal scarring comprised 3 females and 1 male, with a median age of 8.5 years. All abnormal scarring occurred in affected overgrowth tissue. Three of the 4 patients developed the excessive scarring after debulking procedures for overgrowth and/or vascular malformations of the upper or lower extremity. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Excessive scarring occurred frequently in patients with PIK3CA-related overgrowth syndromes. The risk of abnormal scarring should therefore be discussed preoperatively. Given the activating nature of these PIK3CA variants, we suggest that the excessive scarring may be owing in part to up-regulation of the PI3K-Akt-mTOR pathway. Additional studies are needed to assess scarring outcomes in patients with other types of overgrowth.

Infantile hemangiomas (IHs) are common neoplasms composed of proliferating endothelial-like cells. Despite the relative frequency of IH and the potential severity of complications, there are currently no uniform guidelines for treatment. Although propranolol has rapidly been adopted, there is significant uncertainty and divergence of opinion regarding safety monitoring, dose escalation, and its use in PHACE syndrome (PHACE = posterior fossa, hemangioma, arterial lesions, cardiac abnormalities, eye abnormalities; a cutaneous neurovascular syndrome characterized by large, segmental hemangiomas of the head and neck along with congenital anomalies of the brain, heart, eyes and/or chest wall). A consensus conference was held on December 9, 2011. The multidisciplinary team reviewed existing data on the pharmacologic properties of propranolol and all published reports pertaining to the use of propranolol in pediatric patients. Workgroups were assigned specific topics to propose protocols on the following subjects: contraindications, special populations, pretreatment evaluation, dose escalation, and monitoring. Consensus protocols were recorded during the meeting and refined after the meeting. When appropriate, protocol clarifications and revision were made and agreed upon by the group via teleconference. Because of the absence of high-quality clinical research data, evidence-based recommendations are not possible at present. However, the team agreed on a number of recommendations that arose from a review of existing evidence, including when to treat complicated IH; contraindications and pretreatment evaluation protocols; propranolol use in PHACE syndrome; formulation, target dose, and frequency of propranolol; initiation of propranolol in infants; cardiovascular monitoring; ongoing monitoring; and prevention of hypoglycemia. Where there was considerable controversy, the more conservative approach was selected. We acknowledge that the recommendations are conservative in nature and anticipate that they will be revised as more data are made available. Pediatrics 2013;131:128-140

BACKGROUND: There has been a dramatic increase in the off-label use of ophthalmic timolol maleate, a β-blocker used for infantile hemangioma (IH) treatment as a topical counterpart to oral propranolol. Its safety and efficacy in a pediatric population with IH have not been evaluated in a large cohort. Our goal was to retrospectively assess timolol’s effectiveness, discern characteristics associated with response, and document reported adverse events. METHODS: A multicenter retrospective cohort study of 731 patients treated with topical timolol was completed at 9 centers. Inclusion required an IH suitable for timolol in the treating physician’s judgment and access to clinical details including photographs. Logistic regression analysis and descriptive statistics were performed. Primary outcome measures were efficacy assessed by using visual analog scales for color and for size, extent, and volume from review of digital photographs taken as standard of care. RESULTS: Most IHs were localized (80.1%) and superficial (55.3%). Risk of disfigurement was the most common indication for therapy (74.3%). Duration of therapy (P < .0001), initial thinness (P = .008), and subtype (P = .031) were significant predictors of response. Best response occurred in superficial IHs CONCLUSIONS: Timolol seems to be a well-tolerated, safe treatment option with moderate to good effectiveness, demonstrating best response in thin, superficial IHs regardless of pretreatment size. Timolol can be recommended as an alternative to systemic β-blockers and watchful waiting for many patients.

Xeroderma pigmentosum (XP) is a rare autosomal recessive defect in DNA endonuclease activity that is associated with the development of cutaneous malignancies, at sun exposed sites, including basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma, and melanoma. Squamous cell carcinomas are also known to target the anterior tongue. Patients sometimes develop angiosarcomas, and these invariably arise from sun-exposed skin. A biopsy was taken from a large mass arising in the anterior tongue of an 11-year-old girl with XP and a history of cutaneous basal cell carcinomas. The histopathologic findings demonstrated a high grade epithelioid neoplasm resembling a poorly differentiated squamous cell carcinoma, but the immunohistochemical profile (AE1/AE3 negative, p63 negative, CD31 positive, CD34 positive) established the diagnosis of angiosarcoma. Angiosarcoma is an XP-related tumor that usually arises in sun-exposed skin but can also arise in the oral cavity. For patients with XP who develop epithelioid neoplasms of the oral cavity, epithelioid angiosarcoma should be considered in the differential diagnosis.

Importance While propranolol is touted as superior to prednisolone for treating infantile hemangiomas (IH), a randomized clinical trial (RCT) comparing the outcome and tolerability of these medications for symptomatic, proliferating IH has not been reported. Objectives To determine if oral propranolol is more efficacious and better tolerated than prednisolone in treating symptomatic, proliferating IH and to determine the feasibility of conducting a multi-institutional, RCT comparing efficacy and tolerability of both medications. Design, Setting, and Participants Phase 2, investigator-blinded, multi-institutional RCT conducted in 3 academic vascular anomalies clinics on 19 of 44 eligible infants aged between 2 weeks and 6 months. All participating patients had symptomatic proliferating IH treated between September 1, 2010, and August 1, 2012. Interventions Treatment with oral propranolol vs prednisolone (2.0 mg/kg/d) until halted owing to toxic effects or clinical response. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary outcome was change in IH size after 4 months of therapy. Secondary outcomes were response rate and frequency and severity of adverse events (AEs). Results The primary outcome showed no difference in lesion size or affected skin area after 4 months of therapy: 41% and 1.32 mm 2 for prednisolone vs 64% and 0.55 mm 2 for propranolol ( P = .12 for lesion size, and P = .56 for affected skin area). Longitudinal analyses showed a faster response in total lesion outer dimension with prednisolone ( P = .03), but this advantage over time was not noted when central clearing and outer dimension were included in the analysis ( P = .91). The overall frequency of AEs was similar (44 for prednisolone vs 32 for propranolol) ( P = .84), but prednisolone-treated participants had more grade 3 severe AEs (11 vs 1) ( P = .01), particularly growth retardation resulting in size and weight below the fifth percentile. Early study withdrawal owing to AEs occurred in 6 (75%) of 8 patients in the prednisolone group but 0 of 11 propranolol-treated participants. The mean duration of therapy was shorter for prednisolone (141 vs 265 days), reflecting the higher rate of early withdrawals. Conclusions and Relevance Both medications show similar efficacy for reducing the area of symptomatic, proliferating IH. Although prednisolone showed a faster response rate, propranolol was better tolerated with significantly fewer severe AEs. Propranolol should be the first line of therapy for symptomatic IH unless contraindicated or unless future studies demonstrate severe AEs from propranolol. Recruiting participants for a phase 3 RCT would be difficult owing to safety profiles measured here and emerging trends favoring propranolol. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier:NCT00967226