Early allergen exposure and atopic eczema

Background The relationship between exposure to indoor aeroallergens in early life and subsequent eczema is unclear. We have previously failed to show any significant associations between early life exposure to house dust mite and cat fur allergens and either sensitization to these allergens or wheeze. We have also previously reported a lower prevalence of parent-reported, doctor-diagnosed eczema by age 2 years for children exposed to higher concentrations of house dust mite, but no other associations with other definitions of eczema or for exposure to cat allergen. Objectives To extend the exposure–response analysis of allergen exposure and eczema outcomes measured up to age 8 years, and to investigate the role of other genetic and environmental determinants. Methods A total of 593 children (92Æ4% of those eligible) born to all newly pregnant women attending one of three general practitioner surgeries in Ashford, Kent, were followed from birth to age 8 years. Concentrations of house dust mite and cat allergen were measured in dust samples collected from the home at 8 weeks after birth. The risk of subsequent eczema as defined by the U.K. diagnostic criteria was determined according to different levels (quintiles) of allergen exposure at birth. Results By age 8 years, 150 (25Æ3%) children had met the diagnostic criteria for eczema at least once. Visible flexural dermatitis was recorded at least once for 129 (28Æ0%). As in other studies, parental allergic history was positively associated with most eczema outcomes, as were higher maternal education and less crowded homes. No clear linear associations between early exposure to house dust mite or cat allergen were found, regardless of the definition of eczema used. The risk of eczema appeared to increase for the three lowest quintiles of house dust mite allergen exposure (odds ratio, OR 1Æ37 for third quintile compared with first), and then to fall for the two highest quintiles (OR 0Æ66 and 0Æ71) even after controlling for confounding factors. Conclusions The lack of any clear exposure–disease relationship between allergens in early life and subsequent eczema argues against allergen exposure being a major factor causing eczema. If the lower levels of eczema at higher levels of house dust mite are confirmed, then interventions aimed at reducing house dust mite in early infancy could paradoxically increase the risk of subsequent eczema.

Should eye protection be worn during dermatological surgery: prospective observational study

Background There is a potential risk of infection with blood-borne viruses if a doctor receives a blood splash to a mucous membrane. The quantification of facial contamination with blood has never been documented in the context of dermatological surgery. Objectives (i) To identify the number of facial blood splashes that occur during skin surgery and to identify the procedures that present higher risks for the operator and assistant. (ii) To assess the provision of eye protection and attitudes to its use in dermatological surgery in the U.K. Methods (i) Prospective, observational study in the skin surgery suite of a U.K. teaching hospital assessing 100 consecutive dermatological surgery procedures, plus 100 consecutive operations in which an assistant was present. Primary outcome: number of face-mask visors with at least one blood splash. Secondary outcomes: to identify if any of the following variables influenced the occurrence of a blood splash: grade of operator, site and type of procedure, and the use of electrocautery. (ii) A postal survey of all U.K.-based members of the British Society of Dermatological Surgery (BSDS) was conducted assessing facilities available and the attitudes of U.K.-based clinicians to the use of face masks during surgery. Results (i) In 33% of all surgical procedures there was at least one facial splash to the operator (range 1–75) and in 15% of procedures the assistant received at least one splash (range 1–11). Use of monopolar electrocautery was significantly less likely to result in splashes to the mask compared with bipolar electrocautery [odds ratio (OR) 0Æ04; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0Æ01–0Æ19]. Compared with the head/neck, operations on the body were significantly more likely to result in splashes to the mask (OR 6Æ52) (95% CI 1Æ7–25Æ07). The type of procedure and the status of the operator did not have a bearing on the likelihood of receiving a splash to the mask. (ii) From the survey, 33 of 159 (20Æ8%) of BSDS members had no face masks available and 54 of 159 (34Æ0%) did not wear any facial protection while operating. The majority (53Æ5%) thought they received a splash in £ 1% of procedures. Conclusions There is a substantial risk of a splash of blood coming into contact with the face during dermatological surgery for both the operator and assistant, regardless of the procedure. The risk of receiving a blood splash to the face may be substantially underestimated by U.K.-based dermatologists. The use of protective eyewear is advisable at all times, but particularly when using bipolar electrocautery, or when operating on high-risk individuals.