Title: Cutaneous Adverse Drug Reactions: A Two Years Retrospective Study From A Tertiary Care Hospital In Sub Himalayan Region
Authors: Dr Saru Thakur, Dr Mudita Gupta, Dr Gr Tegta, Dr Samriti Sood, Dr Kuldeep Verma
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v5i2.94
Abstract
A wide spectrum of cutaneous manifestations can be produced by drugs.
Aim: To determine the clinicoepidemiological pattern of drug eruptions and their causative agents in indoor patients.
Methods: Sixty patients who were admitted indermatology ward with cutaneous adverse reactions were included in this study from January 2015 to December 2016. Demographic characteristics, drug suspected, duration between drug intake and onset of reaction, route, medical history, physical examination, laboratory investigations were recorded.
Results: Male to female ratio was 1.22: 1. The mean age group of patients was 45±3.4 years. Interval between the drug intake by both oral and intravenous routes had a mean of 25.6± 4.94 days. Most common presentation was maculopapular rash seen in 21 patients (35%) followed by exfoliative dermatitis. Overall, the most common offending drugs were antibiotics as a whole seen in 27 patients (45%) followed by antiepileptic group in 13 patients (21.6%). Abnormal eosinophil counts were seen in 17 patients (28.3%). Liver function abnormalities were seen in 15 patients (25%). Rare presentations were anaphylaxis to paracetamol, photosensitivity to erlotinib and Acute Generalized exanthematous pustulosis to anti tubercular drugs. Outcome was favourable in 95% patients.
Conclusion: Detailed warnings should be issued to patients prohibiting future use of same or related drugs. In case of generalized severe drug rash early institution of steroids reduces morbidity and mortality
Key words: adverse cutaneous drug reaction, clinico epidemiological pattern.
References
1. Nayak S, Acharjya B. Adverse cutaneous drug reaction. Indian J Dermatol. 2008; 53(1) : 2-8.
2. Sharma R, Dogra D, Dogra N. A study of cutaneous adverse drug reactions at a tertiary centre in Jammu, India. Indian Dermatol Online J. 2015;6:168-71.
3. Akpinar F, Dervis E. Drug Eruptions : An 8-year study including 106 patients at a Dermatology Cinic in Turkey. Indian J Dermatol. 2012;57:194-8.
4. Edwards IR, Aronson JK. Adverse drug reactions: definitions, diagnosis and mana-gement. The Lancet. 2000; 356: 1255-9.
5. Suther JV, Desai SV. A study of adverse cutaneous drug reactions in outdoor patients attending to Skin and V.D. Department of Shree Krishna Hospital, Karamsad. Int J Res Pharm Biomed Sci 2011;2:2229-31.
6. Patel RM, Marfatia YS. Clinical study of cutaneous drug eruptions in 200 patients. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2008; 74: 430-6.
7. Pudukadan D, Thapa DM. Adverse cutaneous drug reactions: Clinical pattern and causative agents in a tertiary care centre in South India. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2004; 70: 20-24.
8. Sharma VK, Sethuraman G, Kumar B. Cutaneous adverse drug reactions: Clinical pattern and causative agents - A 6 year series from Chandigarh, India. J Postgrad Med 2001;47:95-9.
9. Sullivan JR, Shear NH. Drug eruptions and other adverse drug effects in aged skin. Clin Geriatr Med 2002;18:21-42.
10. Nadimpalli SKKV, Badabagni P, Dasika S, Bendapudi RV. A study of cutaneous adverse drug eruptions in dermatological practice. Indian J Clin Exp Dermatol. 2016; 2: 79-83.
11. Qayoom S, Bisati S, Manzoor S, Sameem F, Khan K. Adverse cutaneous drug reactions – A clinic-demographic study in a tertiary care teaching hospital of the Kashmir valley, India. Arch Iran Med. 2015; 18 : 228-33.
12. Bachmeyer C, Vermeulen C, Habki R, Blay F, Leynadier F. Acetaminophen (paracetamol)-induced anaphylactic shock. South Med J. 2002;95:759-60.
13. Tokimasa Y, Fujiwara K, Higo H, Kameyama N, Kayatani H, SatoK, Matsuo K et al. Photosensitivity reaction induced by erlotinib. Int Canc Conf J. 2012; 1: 173-5.
14. Cantisani C, Paradisi A, Richetta AG, Mattozzi C, Calvieri S. Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis during antituberculosis therapy. Clin Ter 2013; 164: 137-8.
15. Romagosa R, Kapoor S, Sanders J, Berman B. Inpatient adverse cutaneous drug eruptions and eosinophilia. Arch Dermatolo 2001;137:511-2.
16. Hafner JW, Belknap SW, Squillante MD, Bucheit KA. Adverse drug events in emergency department patients. Ann Emerg Med 2002;39:258-67
17. Kakande B, Lehloenya RJ. Drug reactions associated with antituberculosis drugs. Curren allergy Clin Immunol. 2015; 28: 264-8.
18. Patel TK, Thakkar SH, Sharma DC. Cutaneous adverse drug reactions in Indian population: A systematic review. Indian Dematol Online J. 2014; 5 :76-86.
19. Patel TK, Patel PB, Barvaliya MJ, Tripathi CB. Drug-induced anaphylactic reactions in Indian population : A systematic review. Indian J Crit Care Med. 2014;18: 796-806.
20. Temkin NR, Dikmen SS, Wilensky AJ, Keihm J, Chabal S,Winn HR. A rando-mized, Double-blind study of phenytoin for the prevention of post – traumatic seiz-ures. N Engl J Med. 1990; 323: 497-502.