Anetoderma of prematurity in association with electrocardiographic electrodes
ABSTRACT Anetoderma in premature infants is an uncommon lesion that may be associated with the use of various types of monitoring leads. In 2 infants multiple papules of anetoderma occurred on the forehead in association with the use of gel electrocardiographic electrodes. It is postulated that the cause of these papules was a local hypoxemia caused by pressure from the electrodes. Growth-restricted infants may be particularly predisposed to iatrogenic anetoderma.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: After treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) via nasal masks and a face mask, three neonates developed pressure necrosis involving their central forehead and left eyebrow. The pressure necrosis resulted in permanent scarring in all three infants. We describe a case series of a new cutaneous iatrogenic complication of CPAP.Pediatric Dermatology 01/2011; 29(1):45-8. DOI:10.1111/j.1525-1470.2011.01537.x · 1.52 Impact Factor
Article: Neonatal dermatology[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Recent advances in neonatology and dermatology have provided us with a better understanding of neonatal and premature infant skin. The problems associated with immature skin become evident immediately after birth and require constant attention throughout the neonatal period. As advances in neonatal care push the gestational age of viability lower, skin maturation and function become increasingly important clinical problems. Premature skin immaturity contributes to elevated water loss, problems with electrolytes and thermoregulation, increased risk of local or systemic infection, increased uptake of potentially toxic agents, and vulnerability to trauma. This review discusses the unique nature of dermal structure and function in very low birth weight infants, evidence of mechanical fragility, toxicity of various topical agents, and the use of emollients. The opinions expressed are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the Navy or Department of Defense.Current Opinion in Pediatrics 11/1999; 11(5):471-4. DOI:10.1016/S1040-0486(00)90032-2 · 2.74 Impact Factor