Risk Factors for Latex Sensitization in Children with Spina Bifida

Background: Children with spina bifida represent the major risk group for latex sensitization. Purpose: To determine the prevalence of latex sensitization in these children and to identify risk factors. Material and methods: We studied 57 patients with spina bifida. The mean age was 5.6 years and the male/female ratio was 0.8/1. In all patients a questionnaire, skin prick test (SPT) with latex (UCBStallergènes, Lofarma and ALK-Abelló), common aeroallergens and fruits (UCB-Stallergènes) and serum determination of total IgE (AlaSTAT) were performed. Results: The prevalence of latex sensitization was 30 %; only two sensitized children (12 %) had symptoms after exposure. Risk factors for latex sensitization were age 5 years (p = 0.008; OR = 6.0; 95% CI = 1.7-22.1), having at least four previous surgical interventions (p < 0.0001; OR = 18.5; 95% CI = 3.6-94.8), having undergone surgery in the first 3 months of life (p = 0.008; OR = 5.4; 95% CI = 0.7-29.2) and total serum IgE 44 IU/ml (p = 0.03; OR = 3.8; 95 %CI = 1.1-13.1). Multiple logistic regression analysis showed that only a history of four or more surgical interventions (p < 0.0001; OR = 26.3; 95 %CI = 2.9-234.2) and total serum IgE 44 IU/ml (p = 0.02; OR = 8.6; 95% CI = 1.4-53.4) were independently associated with latex sensitization. Sex, family and personal allergic history, hydrocephalus with ventriculoperitoneal shunt, cystourethrograms, intermittent bladder catheterization and atopy were not related to latex sensitization. Conclusions: In children with spina bifida, significant and independent risk factors identified for latex sensitization were multiple interventions and higher levels of total serum IgE. A prospective study will clarify the clinical evolution of assymptomatic children sensitized to latex.

Contraceptive Choices Pre and Post Pregnancy in Adolescence

STUDY OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study is to evaluate the impact of adolescent pregnancy in the future contraceptive choices. A secondary aim is to verify whether these choices differ from those made after an abortion. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING:Adolescent Unit of a tertiary care center. PARTICIPANTS:212 pregnant teenagers. INTERVENTIONS: Medical records review. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Intended pregnancy rate and contraceptive methods used before and after pregnancy. For contraceptive choices after pregnancy we considered: Group 1 - teenagers who continued their pregnancy to delivery (n = 106) and Group 2 - the same number of adolescents who chose to terminate their pregnancy. RESULTS: The intended pregnancy rate was 14.2%. Prior to a pregnancy continued to delivery, the most widely used contraceptive method was the male condom (50.9%), followed by oral combined contraceptives (28.3%); 18.9% of adolescents were not using any contraceptive method. After pregnancy, contraceptive implant was chosen by 70.8% of subjects (P < .001) and the oral combined contraceptives remained the second most frequent option (17.9%, P = .058). Comparing these results with Group 2, we found that the outcome of the pregnancy was the main factor in the choices that were made. Thus, after a pregnancy continued to delivery, adolescents prefer the use of LARC [78.4% vs 40.5%, OR: 5,958 - 95% (2.914-12.181), P < .001)], especially contraceptive implants [70.8% vs 38.7%, OR: 4.371 - 95% (2.224-8.591), P < .001], to oral combined contraceptives [17.9% vs 57.5%, OR: 0.118 - 95% CI (0.054-0.258), P < .001]. CONCLUSION:Adolescent pregnancy and its outcome constitute a factor of change in future contraceptive choice.