严重过敏反应的危险因素:食物和辅助因素哪个最重要?

IF 4.8
R Casas-Saucedo, C de la Cruz, G Araujo-Sánchez, S Gelis, T Jimenez, S Riggioni, C San Bartolomé, M Pascal, J Bartra Tomás, R Muñoz-Cano
{"title":"严重过敏反应的危险因素:食物和辅助因素哪个最重要?","authors":"R Casas-Saucedo,&nbsp;C de la Cruz,&nbsp;G Araujo-Sánchez,&nbsp;S Gelis,&nbsp;T Jimenez,&nbsp;S Riggioni,&nbsp;C San Bartolomé,&nbsp;M Pascal,&nbsp;J Bartra Tomás,&nbsp;R Muñoz-Cano","doi":"10.18176/jiaci.0698","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>The prevalence of anaphylactic shock, the most severe manifestation of anaphylaxis, remains unknown. Risk factors and biomarkers have not been fully identified. Objective: To identify risk factors in patients who experience anaphylactic shock.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using lipid transfer protein (LTP) allergy as a model, we compared the characteristics of patients who developed anaphylaxis and anaphylactic shock. We recorded demographics, pollen sensitization, foods ingested up to 2 hours before onset of the reaction, and the presence of cofactors. Culprit foods were identified through a compatible clinical history and positive allergology work-up (skin prick test and/or sIgE).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We evaluated 150 reactions in 55 patients with anaphylaxis (134 reactions) and 12 with anaphylactic shock (16 reactions). Patients in the anaphylaxis group experienced twice as many reactions (mean [SD], 2.4 [2.5] for anaphylaxis vs 1.3 [1.5] for anaphylactic shock; P<.02). No relationship was found between any food group and severity of the reaction. The most frequent food involved in both groups of patients was the combination of several plant-derived foods (plant food mix), followed by peach and nuts. Indeed, in the reactions caused by plant food mix, the presence of a cofactor was observed more often than in other food groups. On the other hand, cofactors were not present in peach- and nut-related reactions. Exercise was the most frequent cofactor in all groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In our series, the severity of the reactions was not determined by the kind of food or presence of a cofactor. Anaphylactic shock seems to be an infrequent presentation that may be associated with other individual-related factors requiring further evaluation.</p>","PeriodicalId":520676,"journal":{"name":"Journal of investigational allergology & clinical immunology","volume":" ","pages":"282-290"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-07-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk Factors in Severe Anaphylaxis: Which Matters the Most, Food or Cofactors?\",\"authors\":\"R Casas-Saucedo,&nbsp;C de la Cruz,&nbsp;G Araujo-Sánchez,&nbsp;S Gelis,&nbsp;T Jimenez,&nbsp;S Riggioni,&nbsp;C San Bartolomé,&nbsp;M Pascal,&nbsp;J Bartra Tomás,&nbsp;R Muñoz-Cano\",\"doi\":\"10.18176/jiaci.0698\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objective: </strong>The prevalence of anaphylactic shock, the most severe manifestation of anaphylaxis, remains unknown. Risk factors and biomarkers have not been fully identified. Objective: To identify risk factors in patients who experience anaphylactic shock.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using lipid transfer protein (LTP) allergy as a model, we compared the characteristics of patients who developed anaphylaxis and anaphylactic shock. We recorded demographics, pollen sensitization, foods ingested up to 2 hours before onset of the reaction, and the presence of cofactors. Culprit foods were identified through a compatible clinical history and positive allergology work-up (skin prick test and/or sIgE).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We evaluated 150 reactions in 55 patients with anaphylaxis (134 reactions) and 12 with anaphylactic shock (16 reactions). Patients in the anaphylaxis group experienced twice as many reactions (mean [SD], 2.4 [2.5] for anaphylaxis vs 1.3 [1.5] for anaphylactic shock; P<.02). No relationship was found between any food group and severity of the reaction. The most frequent food involved in both groups of patients was the combination of several plant-derived foods (plant food mix), followed by peach and nuts. Indeed, in the reactions caused by plant food mix, the presence of a cofactor was observed more often than in other food groups. On the other hand, cofactors were not present in peach- and nut-related reactions. Exercise was the most frequent cofactor in all groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In our series, the severity of the reactions was not determined by the kind of food or presence of a cofactor. Anaphylactic shock seems to be an infrequent presentation that may be associated with other individual-related factors requiring further evaluation.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520676,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of investigational allergology & clinical immunology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"282-290\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-07-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of investigational allergology & clinical immunology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18176/jiaci.0698\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/5/4 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of investigational allergology & clinical immunology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18176/jiaci.0698","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/5/4 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

摘要

背景与目的:过敏性休克是过敏性反应最严重的表现,其患病率尚不清楚。风险因素和生物标志物尚未完全确定。目的:探讨过敏性休克患者的危险因素。方法:以脂质转移蛋白(LTP)过敏为模型,比较发生过敏反应和过敏性休克患者的特征。我们记录了人口统计学、花粉致敏、反应发生前2小时摄入的食物以及辅助因子的存在。通过兼容的临床病史和阳性过敏检查(皮肤点刺试验和/或sIgE)来确定罪魁祸首食物。结果:我们评估了55例过敏反应患者(134例)和12例过敏性休克患者(16例)的150例反应。过敏反应组患者的反应次数是过敏反应组的两倍(平均[SD],过敏反应组为2.4[2.5],过敏性休克组为1.3 [1.5];结论:在我们的研究中,反应的严重程度不是由食物种类或辅助因素决定的。过敏性休克似乎是一种罕见的表现,可能与其他需要进一步评估的个体相关因素有关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Risk Factors in Severe Anaphylaxis: Which Matters the Most, Food or Cofactors?

Background and objective: The prevalence of anaphylactic shock, the most severe manifestation of anaphylaxis, remains unknown. Risk factors and biomarkers have not been fully identified. Objective: To identify risk factors in patients who experience anaphylactic shock.

Methods: Using lipid transfer protein (LTP) allergy as a model, we compared the characteristics of patients who developed anaphylaxis and anaphylactic shock. We recorded demographics, pollen sensitization, foods ingested up to 2 hours before onset of the reaction, and the presence of cofactors. Culprit foods were identified through a compatible clinical history and positive allergology work-up (skin prick test and/or sIgE).

Results: We evaluated 150 reactions in 55 patients with anaphylaxis (134 reactions) and 12 with anaphylactic shock (16 reactions). Patients in the anaphylaxis group experienced twice as many reactions (mean [SD], 2.4 [2.5] for anaphylaxis vs 1.3 [1.5] for anaphylactic shock; P<.02). No relationship was found between any food group and severity of the reaction. The most frequent food involved in both groups of patients was the combination of several plant-derived foods (plant food mix), followed by peach and nuts. Indeed, in the reactions caused by plant food mix, the presence of a cofactor was observed more often than in other food groups. On the other hand, cofactors were not present in peach- and nut-related reactions. Exercise was the most frequent cofactor in all groups.

Conclusion: In our series, the severity of the reactions was not determined by the kind of food or presence of a cofactor. Anaphylactic shock seems to be an infrequent presentation that may be associated with other individual-related factors requiring further evaluation.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信