Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Rev Alerg Mex ; 66(2): 205-216, 2019.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31200419

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Little is known out the sensitization to shrimp in patients with respiratory allergies who are sensitized to mites and about the clinical relevance of that sensitization in the tropical region. OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of sensitization to shrimp in patients with rhinitis or asthma who are sensitized to mites, to explore the route of sensitization, its relevance, and the role of sensitization to tropomyosin. METHODS: A cross-sectional study in patients with asthma and rhinitis who are sensitized to mites. Through a survey, it was asked about the consumption of shrimp and the control of asthma or rhinitis. Oral provocation tests were carried out with shrimp on individuals who are sensitized to mites and shrimp without consumption, or consumption greater than six months before, without reaction history. In a subgroup, the sIgE was measured for shrimp, Der p and Lit v 1. The patients who are sensitized to mites and shrimp (cases) were compared to the patients who are sensitized only to mites (controls). RESULTS: Out of 229 patients, 48 (21%) were sensitized to shrimp. There wasn't a statistically significant difference in the intake of shrimp between cases (54.2%) and controls (49.7%); eight cases showed symptoms on contact with shrimp. No statistically significant differences were found in the sIgE for Der p, Lit v1 and shrimp between cases and controls. A medium change was observed in the size of the effect: 0.45, 0.44 and 0.41 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Sensitization to shrimp in patients with asthma or allergic rhinitis caused by mites is high; in 25% it seems to be clinically relevant, mainly in those with asthma. Intake is not the main route of exposure to tropomyosin; cross-reactivity can explain the frequency of sensitization.


Antecedentes: Se conoce poco sobre la sensibilización a camarón en pacientes con alergias respiratorias sensibilizados a ácaros y la importancia clínica de dicha sensibilización en el trópico. Objetivos: Determinar la prevalencia de sensibilización a camarón en pacientes con rinitis o asma sensibilizados a ácaros, explorar la ruta de sensibilización, su relevancia y el papel de la sensibilización a tropomiosina. Métodos: Estudio de corte transversal en pacientes con asma y rinitis sensibilizados a ácaros. Mediante encuesta se indagó consumo de camarón y control del asma o rinitis. Se realizaron pruebas de provocación oral con camarón a los individuos sensibilizados a ácaros y camarón sin consumo, o con consumo mayor a seis meses, sin historia de reacción. En un subgrupo se midió la sIgE para camarón, Der p y Lit v 1. Se compararon los pacientes sensibilizados a ácaro y camarón (casos) y los sensibilizados solo a ácaros (controles). Resultados: De 229 pacientes, 48 (21 %) se encontraban sensibilizados a camarón. No hubo diferencia estadísticamente significativa en la ingesta de camarón entre casos (54.2 %) y controles (49.7 %); ocho casos presentaron síntomas al contacto con camarón. No se encontraron diferencias estadísticamente significativas en la sIgE para Der p, Lit v1 y camarón entre casos y controles. Se observó cambio mediano en la magnitud de efecto: 0.45, 0.44 y 0.41, respectivamente. Conclusiones: La sensibilización a camarón en pacientes con asma o rinitis alérgica por ácaros es alta, en 25 % parece ser clínicamente relevante, principalmente en aquellos con asma. La ingesta no es la principal vía de exposición a la tropomiosina; la reactividad cruzada puede explicar la frecuencia de sensibilización.


Subject(s)
Asthma/immunology , Food Hypersensitivity/immunology , Mites , Penaeidae , Rhinitis, Allergic/immunology , Shellfish , Tropomyosin/immunology , Animals , Asthma/complications , Cross Reactions , Cross-Sectional Studies , Female , Food Hypersensitivity/epidemiology , Food Hypersensitivity/etiology , Humans , Male , Prevalence , Rhinitis, Allergic/complications
2.
Rev Alerg Mex ; 65(1): 78-91, 2018.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29723943

ABSTRACT

Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease comprises a series of signs and symptoms mainly involving the upper and lower posterior airway after the consumption of cyclooxygenase enzyme inhibitors. Adverse reactions that occur are not considered to be an allergy and are common to all non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and cross-reactivity between these agents is therefore common. The description of 3 clinical cases serves to review key aspects of this condition, such as epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, diagnosis and management. Adequate diagnosis and education on the use or elimination of all different NSAIDs is essential, as well as availability of different analgesic options, verified with challenge tests. Aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease management includes surgical procedures for nasal polyp control, pharmacological treatment for asthma control and desensitization with aspirin in selected individuals.


La enfermedad respiratoria exacerbada por aspirina comprende un conjunto de signos y síntomas que involucran principalmente la vía aérea superior e inferior posterior al consumo de inhibidores de la enzima ciclooxigenasa. Las reacciones adversas que se presentan no se consideran una alergia y son comunes a todos los antiinflamatorios no esteroideos, por lo que la reactividad cruzada entre estos es común. La descripción de tres casos clínicos con diferentes situaciones sirve para revisar aspectos clave de la enfermedad como la epidemiologia, fisiopatología, manifestaciones clínicas, diagnóstico y manejo. El adecuado diagnóstico y educación en el uso o eliminación de los diferentes AINE es fundamental, al igual que la disposición de opciones analgésicas alternativas, comprobadas mediante pruebas de provocación. El manejo de la enfermedad respiratoria exacerbada por aspirina incluye procedimientos quirúrgicos para el control de los pólipos nasales, tratamiento farmacológico para el control del asma y desensibilización con aspirina en individuos seleccionados.


Subject(s)
Asthma, Aspirin-Induced , Adult , Asthma, Aspirin-Induced/diagnosis , Asthma, Aspirin-Induced/physiopathology , Asthma, Aspirin-Induced/therapy , Disease Progression , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
3.
Rev Alerg Mex ; 64(1): 126-129, 2017.
Article in Spanish | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28188719

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Skin prick test is the most widely used test for the diagnosis of IgE-mediated conditions. Commercial extracts are used for its performance, but in the case of fruits and vegetables it is preferable using fresh food. Although both tests possess a good safety profile, hypersensitivity reactions have been recorded. CLINICAL CASE: Forty-seven-year old woman with a history of persistent allergic rhinitis, sensitized to the pollen of grasses, olive and salsola; she was referred to an allergology department due to anaphylaxis triggered by the consumption of avocado, cantaloupe, carrots and watermelon. Minutes after skin prick test with standardized extract and skin prick with fresh foods, she developed dyspnea, pruritus, erythema, dizziness and sibilance; she was administered 0.5 mg of intramuscular adrenalin and 4 salbutamol inhalations and placed in the Trendelemburg position. Dyspnea persisted, and vital signs monitoring showed heart and respiratory rates increase and, hence, salbutamol was applied again, together with 2 L/min of oxygen delivered by nasal cannula, intravenous fluids and 100 mg intravenous hydrocortisone; improvement was observed at 40 minutes. The patient was hospitalized for 48 hours. CONCLUSIONS: Although skin tests are safe, the risk of hypersensitivity and anaphylactic reactions should not be ruled out, especially in susceptible patients.


Antecedentes: La prueba por punción epidérmica es la principal prueba para el diagnóstico de enfermedades mediadas por IgE. Para su realización se utilizan extractos comerciales; en el caso de frutas y verduras es mejor emplear alimentos frescos. Si bien ambas modalidades poseen un buen perfil de seguridad, se han registrado reacciones de hipersensibilidad. Caso clínico: Mujer de 47 años de edad con antecedentes de rinitis alérgica persistente, sensibilizada a polen de gramíneas, olivo y salsola; fue remitida a un servicio de alergología por anafilaxia desencadenada por el consumo de aguacate, melón, zanahoria y sandía. Minutos después de la punción cutánea con extracto estandarizado y punción cutánea con alimentos frescos, desarrolló disnea, prurito, eritema, mareo y sibilancias. Se le administraron 0.5 mg de adrenalina intramuscular y 4 inhalaciones de salbutamol; también fue colocada en posición de Trendelemburg. La disnea persistió y el monitoreo de los signos vitales mostró incremento de las frecuencias cardiaca y respiratoria, por lo que se aplicó nuevamente salbutamol, 2 L/min de oxígeno por cánula nasal, líquidos endovenosos y 100 mg de hidrocortisona intravenosa; a los 40 minutos se observó mejoría. La paciente fue hospitalizada durante 48 horas. Conclusiones: Aunque las pruebas cutáneas son seguras, no debe excluirse el riesgo de reacciones de hipersensibilidad y anafilaxia, especialmente en pacientes susceptibles.


Subject(s)
Allergens/adverse effects , Anaphylaxis/etiology , Food Hypersensitivity/complications , Skin Tests/adverse effects , Albuterol/therapeutic use , Anaphylaxis/drug therapy , Anaphylaxis/physiopathology , Anaphylaxis/therapy , Combined Modality Therapy , Daucus carota , Epinephrine/therapeutic use , Female , Food Hypersensitivity/immunology , Fruit , Hemodynamics , Humans , Hydrocortisone/therapeutic use , Middle Aged , Oxygen Inhalation Therapy , Rhinitis, Allergic, Seasonal/complications
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...