治疗过敏性休克的注射用肾上腺素替代品。

IF 6.3 2区 医学 Q1 ALLERGY
Guillaume Pouessel, Catherine Neukirch
{"title":"治疗过敏性休克的注射用肾上腺素替代品。","authors":"Guillaume Pouessel, Catherine Neukirch","doi":"10.1111/cea.14598","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Adrenaline is the first line treatment for anaphylaxis and adrenaline auto-injectors (AAI) allow reliable, safe and ergonomic administration in the community. However, AAIs have significant limitations and adrenaline is often not used in anaphylaxis. Innovations to administer adrenaline via alternative routes may potentially improve usage rates and treatment effectiveness. Here, we describe the known limitations and barriers to AAI use in anaphylaxis. We then summarise current data for adrenaline devices which use alternative routes of administration for treating anaphylaxis. Several novel devices are in development, which deliver adrenaline via nasal, sublingual or transcutaneous routes. Pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and safety studies have compared these treatments with AAI or intramuscular adrenaline via needle and syringe. The first non-injectable adrenaline delivery device for emergency treatment of anaphylaxis was approved in Europe and the United States. Neffy, an adrenaline nasal spray, is licensed for use in adult and paediatric patients who weigh at least 30 kg. In the near future, multiple alternatives to injectable adrenaline may be available for managing anaphylaxis, overcoming some, but not all of the limitations of AAIs.</p>","PeriodicalId":10207,"journal":{"name":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Alternatives to Injectable Adrenaline for Treating Anaphylaxis.\",\"authors\":\"Guillaume Pouessel, Catherine Neukirch\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/cea.14598\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Adrenaline is the first line treatment for anaphylaxis and adrenaline auto-injectors (AAI) allow reliable, safe and ergonomic administration in the community. However, AAIs have significant limitations and adrenaline is often not used in anaphylaxis. Innovations to administer adrenaline via alternative routes may potentially improve usage rates and treatment effectiveness. Here, we describe the known limitations and barriers to AAI use in anaphylaxis. We then summarise current data for adrenaline devices which use alternative routes of administration for treating anaphylaxis. Several novel devices are in development, which deliver adrenaline via nasal, sublingual or transcutaneous routes. Pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and safety studies have compared these treatments with AAI or intramuscular adrenaline via needle and syringe. The first non-injectable adrenaline delivery device for emergency treatment of anaphylaxis was approved in Europe and the United States. Neffy, an adrenaline nasal spray, is licensed for use in adult and paediatric patients who weigh at least 30 kg. In the near future, multiple alternatives to injectable adrenaline may be available for managing anaphylaxis, overcoming some, but not all of the limitations of AAIs.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Clinical and Experimental Allergy\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-24\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Clinical and Experimental Allergy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14598\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ALLERGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical and Experimental Allergy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14598","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

肾上腺素是治疗过敏性休克的一线药物,肾上腺素自动注射器(AAI)可以在社区内可靠、安全、符合人体工程学的使用。然而,自动肾上腺素注射器有很大的局限性,肾上腺素通常不用于过敏性休克的治疗。通过其他途径给药肾上腺素的创新方法有可能提高使用率和治疗效果。在此,我们将介绍过敏性休克患者使用 AAI 的已知限制和障碍。然后,我们总结了使用其他给药途径治疗过敏性休克的肾上腺素装置的当前数据。目前正在开发几种新型装置,可通过鼻腔、舌下或经皮途径给药肾上腺素。药代动力学、药效学和安全性研究已将这些治疗方法与 AAI 或通过针头和注射器肌肉注射肾上腺素进行了比较。首个用于过敏性休克紧急治疗的非注射肾上腺素给药装置已在欧洲和美国获得批准。肾上腺素鼻喷雾器 Neffy 已获得许可,可用于体重至少为 30 千克的成人和儿童患者。在不久的将来,可能会出现多种替代注射肾上腺素的方法来治疗过敏性休克,从而克服 AAI 的部分(但不是全部)局限性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Alternatives to Injectable Adrenaline for Treating Anaphylaxis.

Adrenaline is the first line treatment for anaphylaxis and adrenaline auto-injectors (AAI) allow reliable, safe and ergonomic administration in the community. However, AAIs have significant limitations and adrenaline is often not used in anaphylaxis. Innovations to administer adrenaline via alternative routes may potentially improve usage rates and treatment effectiveness. Here, we describe the known limitations and barriers to AAI use in anaphylaxis. We then summarise current data for adrenaline devices which use alternative routes of administration for treating anaphylaxis. Several novel devices are in development, which deliver adrenaline via nasal, sublingual or transcutaneous routes. Pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and safety studies have compared these treatments with AAI or intramuscular adrenaline via needle and syringe. The first non-injectable adrenaline delivery device for emergency treatment of anaphylaxis was approved in Europe and the United States. Neffy, an adrenaline nasal spray, is licensed for use in adult and paediatric patients who weigh at least 30 kg. In the near future, multiple alternatives to injectable adrenaline may be available for managing anaphylaxis, overcoming some, but not all of the limitations of AAIs.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.40
自引率
9.80%
发文量
189
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Clinical & Experimental Allergy strikes an excellent balance between clinical and scientific articles and carries regular reviews and editorials written by leading authorities in their field. In response to the increasing number of quality submissions, since 1996 the journals size has increased by over 30%. Clinical & Experimental Allergy is essential reading for allergy practitioners and research scientists with an interest in allergic diseases and mechanisms. Truly international in appeal, Clinical & Experimental Allergy publishes clinical and experimental observations in disease in all fields of medicine in which allergic hypersensitivity plays a part.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信