Clinical profile and virology analysis of hand, foot and mouth disease cases from North Kerala, India in 2015-2016: A tertiary care hospital-based cross-sectional study

{Table 2}{Table 3}{Figure 1} Thirty eight patients (63.3%) had features of atypical hand, foot and mouth disease [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3] and [Figure 2]a and [Figure 2]b.{Figure 2} Detailed workup including polymerase chain reaction-based study of cerebrospinal fluid for viral infection was w...

Full description

Saved in:

Bibliographic Details
Published in:	Indian journal of dermatology, venereology, and leprology Vol. 84; no. 3; pp. 328 - 331
Main Authors:	Sabitha, Sasidharanpillai, Sasidharanpillai, Sarita, Sanjay, Ramachandran, Binitha, Manikoth, Riyaz, Najeeba, Muhammed, Kunnummal, Smitha, Tapron, Vidya, Aparna, Vaishnavi, Kambiam, Saranya, Thalekkara, Arunkumar, Govindakaranavar
Format:	Journal Article
Language:	English
Published:	India Wolters Kluwer India Pvt. Ltd 01-05-2018 Medknow Publications and Media Pvt. Ltd Scientific Scholar
Subjects:	Consent Cross-sectional studies Dermatology Epidemiology Guardians Higher education Infections Influenza Laboratories Patients Polymerase chain reaction Viral infections Virology Viruses China India
Online Access:	Get full text
Tags:	Add Tag No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!

Description
Summary:	{Table 2}{Table 3}{Figure 1} Thirty eight patients (63.3%) had features of atypical hand, foot and mouth disease [Table 1], [Table 2], [Table 3] and [Figure 2]a and [Figure 2]b.{Figure 2} Detailed workup including polymerase chain reaction-based study of cerebrospinal fluid for viral infection was within normal limits in two patients who developed seizures, and febrile seizure was diagnosed in the above cases. [1],[4],[12],[13],[14],[15] Though recurrence of hand, foot and mouth disease in the same season is reported earlier (attributed to infection with a different strain formed by genetic recombination), we cannot comment whether the three patients who gave history of previous hand, foot and mouth disease in our study suffered from same virus infection or not because the earlier diagnosis in these cases was not confirmed by virology workup. [17] Nearly one-third of the clinically suspected cases testing polymerase chain reaction negative for pan enterovirus could be due to delay in sample collection, inadequate material for virology workup, the failure to maintain the cold chain during viral transport and inability to detect a new or uncommon enterovirus RNA by the assay. [...]absence of rash in hands, feet and mouth at the time of presentation does not rule out hand, foot and mouth disease.
Bibliography:	SourceType-Other Sources-1 content type line 63 ObjectType-Correspondence-1
ISSN:	0378-6323 0973-3922 1998-3611
DOI:	10.4103/ijdvl.IJDVL_579_17