A retrospective study describes clinical details and testing practices for pediatric lymphadenopathy in a Colombian hospital, suggesting areas for improvement.
Background: Pediatric lymphadenopathy is a common reason for consultation, but information from secondary-level care in Latin American middle-income settings remains limited. Objective: The objective of this study is to describe the clinical profile, documentation quality, and use of complementary tests among pediatric patients with lymphadenopathy treated at a secondary-level hospital in Córdoba, Colombia. Materials and Methods: A retrospective descriptive study was conducted through a review of 246 medical records of children with lymphadenopathy evaluated between January 2020 and June 2024. Sociodemographic variables, lymph node characteristics, local inflammatory signs, associated clinical conditions, and complementary tests were extracted from the charts. An exploratory composite variable of predefined clinical assessment features recorded in the charts was analyzed descriptively. Results: The median age was 6 years, with 58.9% being male, and 79.7% lived in urban areas. Cervical involvement predominated (87.8%); most documented nodes were ≤1 cm (59.3%), and local inflammatory signs were uncommon (7.3%). Complementary testing was limited (complete blood count: 37.8%, serology: 17.9%, tuberculin skin test: 6.9%, ultrasound: 7.7%, and biopsy: 4.1%), without significant rural–urban differences. At least one predefined clinical assessment feature was recorded in 83.7% of charts, most often multiple nodes or bilateral involvement; these findings should be interpreted descriptively rather than as direct indicators of malignancy or infection. Conclusions: In this secondary-level, record-based series, pediatric lymphadenopathy was usually documented as small cervical node enlargement with limited complementary testing. The main contribution of this study is to describe documentation patterns and real-world initial work-up in a Colombian secondary-level hospital, which may inform standardized assessment and referral pathways.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Narvaez et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: