Iván Tinoco-Moran, Oscar Calderón-Liosa, Margarita Olivares-Gómez, Victor Farinango-Salazar, Iván Chérrez-Ojeda
{"title":"[Clinical case of anaphylaxis due to eye drops].","authors":"Iván Tinoco-Moran, Oscar Calderón-Liosa, Margarita Olivares-Gómez, Victor Farinango-Salazar, Iván Chérrez-Ojeda","doi":"10.29262/ram.v71i1.1324","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Anaphylaxis is a severe systemic allergic reaction that can be life-threatening, timely diagnosis and treatment is required in these patients, one of the most frequent triggers is pharmacological.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To report the case of a patient who presented anaphylaxis due to eye drops.</p><p><strong>Case report: </strong>A 7-year-old male with a history of rhinitis and asthma with good control. It started with itchy eyes, ophthalmic drops were administered, composition: Polyethylene glycol 400, 0.4%, Propylene glycol 3 mg, polyquad 0.001%, presenting at 15 minutes an episode of anaphylaxis initially characterized by pruritus and intense conjunctival erythema, later nausea, vomiting, sweating, weakness, urticaria/facial angioedema and dyspnea were added, this episode was controlled opportunely with Levocetirizine 5 mg sublingual and Betametasona 4 mg intramuscular, progressively improving over the next 2 hours. The patient was evaluated by the Allergist, written recommendations were given to the mother in case this reaction occurred again, the use of the drops was prohibited, and the performance of skin test and a probable conjunctival provocation protocolized with the ophthalmic drops were pending. Accidentally 2 months later the patient was re-exposed with the same eye drops, presenting a similar reaction 15 minutes after the administration of the medication, they went to the emergency room where he received antihistamine and corticosteroid intravenous treatment, after this re-exposure is confirmed to the ophthalmic drops mentioned above as a trigger of anaphylaxis in this patient.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We present a case of conjunctival anaphylaxis after application of eye drops, confirmed by re-exposure to the drug. It is essential to give diagnoses, recommendations with treatments and avoidance of the probable triggering agent of the reaction. The administration of immediate medication when the allergic episode begins in these patients can be vital, even more so when they live far from a health center, as was the case in this patient.</p>","PeriodicalId":101421,"journal":{"name":"Revista alergia Mexico (Tecamachalco, Puebla, Mexico : 1993)","volume":"71 1","pages":"71"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista alergia Mexico (Tecamachalco, Puebla, Mexico : 1993)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29262/ram.v71i1.1324","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: Anaphylaxis is a severe systemic allergic reaction that can be life-threatening, timely diagnosis and treatment is required in these patients, one of the most frequent triggers is pharmacological.
Objective: To report the case of a patient who presented anaphylaxis due to eye drops.
Case report: A 7-year-old male with a history of rhinitis and asthma with good control. It started with itchy eyes, ophthalmic drops were administered, composition: Polyethylene glycol 400, 0.4%, Propylene glycol 3 mg, polyquad 0.001%, presenting at 15 minutes an episode of anaphylaxis initially characterized by pruritus and intense conjunctival erythema, later nausea, vomiting, sweating, weakness, urticaria/facial angioedema and dyspnea were added, this episode was controlled opportunely with Levocetirizine 5 mg sublingual and Betametasona 4 mg intramuscular, progressively improving over the next 2 hours. The patient was evaluated by the Allergist, written recommendations were given to the mother in case this reaction occurred again, the use of the drops was prohibited, and the performance of skin test and a probable conjunctival provocation protocolized with the ophthalmic drops were pending. Accidentally 2 months later the patient was re-exposed with the same eye drops, presenting a similar reaction 15 minutes after the administration of the medication, they went to the emergency room where he received antihistamine and corticosteroid intravenous treatment, after this re-exposure is confirmed to the ophthalmic drops mentioned above as a trigger of anaphylaxis in this patient.
Conclusions: We present a case of conjunctival anaphylaxis after application of eye drops, confirmed by re-exposure to the drug. It is essential to give diagnoses, recommendations with treatments and avoidance of the probable triggering agent of the reaction. The administration of immediate medication when the allergic episode begins in these patients can be vital, even more so when they live far from a health center, as was the case in this patient.