[Allergic responses to date palm and pecan pollen in Israel].

Date palm (Phoenix dactylifera) and pecan (Carya illinoensis) trees are commonly planted in Israel for fruit, for shade, or as ornamental plants. Pollen grains of both species are allergenic; however, the extent of exposure to such pollen and the incidence of allergic response have not been studied here. We therefore investigated skin-test responses to pollen extracts of 12 varieties of palm and 9 of pecan in 705 allergic patients living in 3 cities and 19 rural settlements. Sensitivity to the pollen extracts of both species was much higher among residents of rural than of urban communities. Moreover, there was a definite relationship between the abundance of these trees in a region and the incidence of skin responders to their pollen. Sensitivity was frequent in settlements rich in these 2 species, such as those with nearby commercial date or pecan plantations. In general, sensitivity to date pollen extracts was lower than to pecan. However, differences in skin responses to pollen extracts of various clones were substantiated. Air sampling revealed that pollen pollution decreased considerably with distance from the trees. At approximately 100 m from a source concentrations of airborne pollen were low. Since planting of male palm and pecan trees in population centers would increase pollen pollution, it should be avoided.

[Sensitization to pollens in a changing environment: Israel]. / La sensibilisation aux pollens dans un environnement changeant: Israël.

Israel was originally a country with desert climate and extensive agriculture. During the last 40 years, due to artificial irrigation, a rich vegetation and intensive agriculture have developed. Hayfever prevalence has risen between 1952 and 1986 from an average of 0.3% to 6.3% (with a range from 4% in the urban to 15% in the rural communities). Considering that significant (P less than 0.001) impact of pollen quantity upon hayfever incidence, an elementary pollen information system was organized (as described in the article) to help both allergists and allergic patients in their joint effort to avoid the harmful effect of a changing environment.

Effects of inhaled humidified warm air on nasal patency and nasal symptoms in allergic rhinitis.

The effects of inhaled warm air on nasal patency and on allergic rhinitic symptoms were studied in 102 patients. Treatment consisted of two consecutive 30-minute sessions, during which the patient inhaled saturated, hot (42-44 degrees C) air through the nose. The treatment was repeated 1 week later. During the week following each treatment, every patient recorded his or her subjective response on a daily symptom score card. Nasal patency was determined before and after each treatment by measuring peak nasal inspiratory and expiratory air flow and by measuring the area covered with vapor formed by the exhaled air on a plate. Highly reproducible results were obtained by using these three objective methods. Inhalation of humidified warm air resulted in amelioration of allergic rhinitis symptoms and in increased nasal patency in a high proportion of patients. There were no adverse side effects. This form of therapy seemed effective in the 2-week period in which it was used and would be an additional form of therapy available for those suffering discomfort from allergic rhinitis.

Simultaneous trabeculectomy and cataract extraction.

A combined trabeculectomy and cataract extraction was performed on 46 eyes of 39 patients. The average follow-up period was of 27 months. The intraocular pressure remained controlled without the need of postoperative medication in 33 eyes (71.74%); 12 eyes (26.09%) needed further medical treatment; and in one eye the pressure remained uncontrolled and further surgery was necessary. After surgery the visual acuity improved considerably and the complications were few. The combined procedure has many advantages. The patient is cured by one surgical procedure, his visual acuity improves, his intraocular pressure is reduced to normal, and he is relieved from the need for medication postoperatively. By a single stay in hospital and by reducing the number of postoperative medical routine controls the expenses are reduced considerably. Owing to these advantages the combined procedure deserves to be considered in cases of glaucoma and cataract.