A case of atypical hand-foot-and-mouth disease caused by coxsackievirus A6: differential diagnosis from varicella in a pediatric intensive care unit.
A case of atypical hand-foot-and-mouth disease caused by coxsackievirus A6: differential diagnosis from varicella in a pediatric intensive care unit.
复制标题
DOI:
10.7883/yoken.66.564
复制
发表时间:
2013
影响因子:
2.2
通讯作者:
Y. Yasui;Tomohiko Makino;Nozomu Hanaoka;K. Owa;A. Horikoshi;A. Tanaka;Y. Suehiro;H. Shimizu;Kazuhiko Kanou;Masaaki Kobayashi;Masami Konagaya;T. Fujimoto
中科院分区:
文献类型:
--
作者:
Y. Yasui;Tomohiko Makino;Nozomu Hanaoka;K. Owa;A. Horikoshi;A. Tanaka;Y. Suehiro;H. Shimizu;Kazuhiko Kanou;Masaaki Kobayashi;Masami Konagaya;T. Fujimoto
Kobayashi Pediatric Clinic, Fujieda 426-0067, JapanCommunicated by Takaji Wakita(Accepted August 26, 2013)In 2011, a large outbreak of hand-foot-and-mouthdisease (HFMD) caused by coxsackievirus A6 (CV-A6)occurred in Japan and other countries. The cutaneousmanifestations of CV-A6-associated HFMD (CV-A6-HFMD) are more extensive and variable than those ofclassic HFMD (1–3). Differential diagnosis of HFMDfrom chickenpox is occasionally challenging because ofits unusual clinical characteristics. For example, thespread of rashes in CV-A6-HFMD is more toward theextremities and body trunk, a manner different fromthat in typical HFMD in which the rashes are mostly lo-calized to the hands and soles of the feet (1,2).A 24-month-old girl was hospitalized in the pediatricintensive care unit (PICU) on May 16, 2013 (23 days be-fore day 0) due to hypoxemia. The patient had an un-derlying diagnosis of Down syndrome with a ventricularseptal defect and pulmonary hypertension but no histo-ry of varicella infection or vaccination against varicella.Before discharge on June 8, 2013 (day 0), she devel-oped a reddish papular rash with some vesicles on herhip, which rapidly spread throughout her entire bodyand face; she was afebrile.On June 10, 2013 (day 2), the Infection Control Team(ICT) of the Saiseikai Nakatsu Hospital (Osaka, Japan)was notified of this patient as a suspected case of chick-enpox in PICU. Assessment of this case was complicat-ed because the rash spread to her upper and lower ex-tremities; however, it was also observed to a lesserextent on her body trunk but not on the head. Althoughthe papules were comparable to varicella in terms oftheir size (approximately 5 mm), HFMD was consideredto be more likely because there were fewer vesicles thanthat expected for varicella, and the rash was neithercrusted nor pigmented.Infection control policies and measures for varicella-zoster virus (VZV) and enterovirus are different. VZV istransmitted via droplet nuclei, whereas enterovirus istransmitted from person to person via direct contactwith the virus shed from the gastrointestinal or upperrespiratory tract. To prevent enteroviral transmission,hand hygiene is particularly important (4). Althoughthere was no other case of suspected chickenpox inPICU, the Department of Pediatrics was concernedabout the high transmissibility of varicella, which is air-borne. ICT in collaboration with the pediatric staff im-mediately initiated varicella infection control in thepediatric ward and performed laboratory diagnosis fortreatment of the present case. ICT decided to implementthe following responses: (i) immediate isolation of theinfected patient from other children in PICU from June10, 2013; (ii) immediate restriction on PICU use fromJune 10, 2013; and (iii) drafting a plan of broadprophylactic administration of antivirals against VZVfor children who were housed in the same room depend-ing on the laboratory result for VZV.In addition to a specific laboratory examination forVZV, specimens of pharyngeal swabs, vesicular fluid,and feces were collected during the course of medicalcare, and laboratory tests were performed for diagnosisand treatment. Informed consent for this study was ob-tained from the patient’s guardian, and the clinicalsamples were tested to device a treatment plan and in-fection control measures.On June 12, 2013 (day 4), the results of VZV tests in-cluding analysis of IgM, IgG, and specific viral antigen,were negative. On the same day, specimens (vesiclefluid, nasopharyngeal swabs, and feces) were collected,and reverse transcription (RT)-hyper PCR (5) was per-formed to screen for enterovirus in all samples (day 4).RT-hyper PCR was employed because it is faster thanpreviously available PCR methods (5,6).Based on the results obtained by RT-hyper PCR, ICTimmediately terminated varicella surveillance and dis-continued the restriction on PICU use and antiviraltherapy to the patient. The team also withdrew thebroader prophylactic antiviral administration through-out the unit and instead endorsed precautions againstcontact infections.On June 14, 2013 (day 6), RT-PCR was performed todetermine the partial nucleotide sequence of the capsidprotein VP1 cording region. Primer pairs were designed