Abstract
Adverse cutaneous drug reactions (CADRs) are commonly reported type of ADRs and are caused by a wide varieties of drugs. The clinical patterns of adverse cutaneous drug reactions and the drug responsible for them is changing every years due to the emergence of newer molecules and changing trends in the use of drugs.
Our objective was to evaluate the clinical pattern of CADRs and their causative drugs in the tertiary health care.
It was cross sectional observational study of 1 year duration. There wre 52 patients with adverse cutaneous drug reaction were recruited. The majority of CADRs was in the age group of 18-35 years (63.46%). The male to female ratio was 0.79:1.
Fixed drug eruption (FDE) was the most common adverse cutaneous drug reaction (34.61%) followed by maculopapular rash (23.07%), acneform eruption (11.53%), SJS/TEN (11.53%), erythema multiforme (7.69%), urticaria (7.69%) and the most common cause was NSAIDs followed by antimicrobial agents.
Knowledge of these drug eruptions, the causative drugs are essential for the clinicians and implementing the ADRs reporting and monitoring system, one can promote drug safety and better patients care, among health care professionals.
Key words: Cutaneous adverse drug reaction, Adverse drug reaction, causative agents.
References
1. Ralf I Edwards, Jaffery K Aronson. Lancet, 2000, 356, 1255-59.
2. Raksha MP, Marfatia YS. Indian J Dermatol venereal Leprol, 2008, 74, 80.
3. Roujeau JC, Stern RS. Severe adverse cutaneous reaction to drugs N. Engl J Md 1994; 331: 1272-85.
4. Noel MV, Sushma M, Guido S. Cutaneous adverse drug reaction in hospitalized patients in tertiary care centre. Indian J pharmacol 2004; 36:292-5.
5. Adverse drug reaction reporting form. Central drugs standard control organisation available at http//www.cdsco.nic.in (accessed on 14th August 2013).
6. Smidt Na, Mc Queen EG. Adverse reactions to drugs: a comprehensive hospital in –patient survey. NZ Med J 1972; 76: 397-401.
7. Inamdar AC, palit A. Serious cutaneous adverse drug reactions: pathomechanisms and their implications to treatment.
8. De Swarte RD. J allergy clin Immunol, 1984, 74, 209-21
9. Naldi L, Conforti A, venegoni M, Trancon MG, Caputi A, Ghiotto E, et al. Br J clin Pharmacol, 1999, 48, 839-46.
10. W Abebe. J Clin Pharmacy &Ther, 2002, 27, 391-401.
11. Stephens MDB. The diagnosis of adverse medical events associated with drug treatment. Adverse drug react acute poisoning Rev, 1987, 1:1-35
12. Lanctot KL, Naranjo CA. J clin Pharmacol 1994, 34, 142-147.
13. CA Naranjo, U Busto, Toranto Ontario. Clin Pharmacol Ther, 1981, 30, 239-245.
14. Sharma VK, Sethuraman G, Kumar B. J Post Grad Med, 2001, 47(2), 95-99.
15. Sushma M, Noel MV, Ritika MC, James J, Guidos. Pharmaco epidemiology and drug safety, 2005, 14(8), 567-570.
16. Tran C, Knowless SR, Liu BA, Shear NH, J clin Pharmacol, 1998, 38, 1003.
17. Shepherd GM. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am, 1991, 11, 611-13.
18. Kelkar PS, LJT . N Eng J Med, 2001,345, 804-809.
19. Wen Yi Ding, chew Kek Lee . Int J Dermatol, 2010, 49(7), 834-41.
John E, Gimnig, John R, Mac Arthur, Maurice M, Bangombe, et al. Am J Trop Med Hyg, 2006, 74(5), 738-743
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v5i7.10
