Brazilian guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of hereditary angioedema

Hereditary angioedema is an autosomal dominant disease characterized by edema attacks with multiple organ involvement. It is caused by a quantitative or functional deficiency of the C1 inhibitor, which is a member of the serine protease inhibitor family. Hereditary angioedema is unknown to many health professionals and is therefore an underdiagnosed disease. The causes of death from hereditary angioedema include laryngeal edema with asphyxia. The estimated mortality rate in patients in whom the disease goes undetected and who are therefore incorrectly treated is 25-40 percent. In addition to edema of the glottis, hereditary angioedema often results in edema of the gastrointestinal tract, which can be incapacitating. Patients with hereditary angioedema may undergo unnecessary surgical interventions because the digestive tract can be the primary or only organ system involved, thus mimicking acute surgical abdomen. It is estimated that patients with hereditary angioedema experience some degree of disability 20-100 days per year. The Experts in Clinical Immunology and Allergy of the "Associação Brasileira de Alergia e Imunopatologia -ASBAI" developed these guidelines for the diagnosis, therapy, and management of hereditary angioedema.

Testes de provocação com drogas: positividade e segurança / Drug Provocation Tests: positivity and safety

O teste de provocação com droga (TPD) é o padrão-ouro para diagnóstico das reações adversas a drogas (RAD). Analisamos resultados de TPD e discutimos os riscos de reações sistêmicas.Método: Estudo retrospectivo e descritivo no qual foram avaliados os prontuários de 500 pacientes com história de RAD no período de janeiro de 2005 a abril de 2009 e selecionados aqueles submetidos a TPD simples cego placebo controlado. Foram realizados TPD com antibióticos (ATB), anti-inflamatórios não esteroidais (AINE), anestésicos locais (A L) e outros. Caracterizamos esta população quanto ao sexo, idade, testes positivos e ocorrência de reações graves. Resultados: Foram realizados 243 TPD em 198 pacientes, 80,8% mulheres e a média de idade de 39,9 anos. Dentre os TPD, realizamos 19 testes com ATB, 26 com AINE seletivos da COX2, 7 com dipirona, 4 com ácido acetil salicílico, 44 com paracetamol, 93 com AL e 17 com outras medicações. Ocorreram 10 TPD positivos (4,1%) e 4 (1,6%) duvidosos. Os testes positivos ocorreram com ATB (2/19), AINE seletivos da COX 2 (2/26), paracetamol (3/44), AL (3/93). Ocorreram 2 reações graves, sendo 1 choque anafilático por cefalexina e 1 anafilaxia sem choque por bupivacaína. Em 4 pacientes (1,6%) houve positividade para o placebo antes da administração da droga ativa.Conclusões: Testes de provocação com drogas são seguros para realização na prática clínica. Os testes devem ser controlados com placebo e supervisionados por um alergista experiente em provocações com drogas.

Drug provocation test (DPT) is considered the gold standard to establish the diagnosis of adverse drug reactions (ADR). We analyzed DPTs results and we discuss severe systemic reactions to them.Methods: A retrospective analysis was conducted on medicai record of 500 patients with ADR history between January of 2005 and April of 2009. Provocation tests, which were single-blind placebo controlled, are reported. There were DPTs with antibiotics, local anesthetics, non¬steroldal antiinflammatory drugs, among other drugs. Patient's features, DPT positivity and its severe adverse reactions were analyzed. Results: The study sample included 243 DPTs in 198 patients (80.8% women) and the mean age was 39.9 years. Ninety-three DPTs were done with local anesthetics, 19 with antibiotics, 44 with acetaminophen, 26 with COX 2 inhibitors, 7 with dipyrone, 4 with aspirin and 17 with other drugs. There were 10 (4.1%) positive and 4 (1,6%) inconclusive tests. The positive tests were due to antibiotics (2/19), COX 2 inhibitors (2/26), acetaminophen (3/44) and local anesthetics (3/93). Two reactions were severe: one anaphylactic shock due to cephalexin and one anaphylaxis without shock due to bupivacaine. Four patients (1,6%) had placebo reaction, before drug administration.Conclusions: Drug provocation tests are safe to be performed in clinicai practice. They should be placebo controlled and done under allergist supervisiono.