Diagnosis and treatment of Hymenoptera venom allergy: S2k Guideline of the German Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (DGAKI) in collaboration with the Arbeitsgemeinschaft für Berufs- und Umweltdermatologie e.V. (ABD), the Medical Association of German Allergologists (AeDA), the German Society of Dermatology (DDG), the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery (DGHNOKC), the German Society of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine (DGKJ), the Society for Pediatric Allergy and Environmental Medicine (GPA), German Respiratory Society (DGP), and the Austrian Society for Allergy and Immunology (ÖGAI).

Hymenoptera venom (HV) is injected into the skin during a sting by Hymenoptera such as bees or wasps. Some components of HV are potential allergens and can cause large local and/or systemic allergic reactions (SAR) in sensitized individuals. During their lifetime, ~ 3% of the general population will develop SAR following a Hymenoptera sting. This guideline presents the diagnostic and therapeutic approach to SAR following Hymenoptera stings. Symptomatic therapy is usually required after a severe local reaction, but specific diagnosis or allergen immunotherapy (AIT) with HV (VIT) is not necessary. When taking a patient's medical history after SAR, clinicians should discuss possible risk factors for more frequent stings and more severe anaphylactic reactions. The most important risk factors for more severe SAR are mast cell disease and, especially in children, uncontrolled asthma. Therefore, if the SAR extends beyond the skin (according to the Ring and Messmer classification: grade > I), the baseline serum tryptase concentration shall be measured and the skin shall be examined for possible mastocytosis. The medical history should also include questions specific to asthma symptoms. To demonstrate sensitization to HV, allergists shall determine concentrations of specific IgE antibodies (sIgE) to bee and/or vespid venoms, their constituents and other venoms as appropriate. If the results are negative less than 2 weeks after the sting, the tests shall be repeated (at least 4 - 6 weeks after the sting). If only sIgE to the total venom extracts have been determined, if there is double sensitization, or if the results are implausible, allergists shall determine sIgE to the different venom components. Skin testing may be omitted if in-vitro methods have provided a definitive diagnosis. If neither laboratory diagnosis nor skin testing has led to conclusive results, additional cellular testing can be performed. Therapy for HV allergy includes prophylaxis of reexposure, patient self treatment measures (including use of rescue medication) in the event of re-stings, and VIT. Following a grade I SAR and in the absence of other risk factors for repeated sting exposure or more severe anaphylaxis, it is not necessary to prescribe an adrenaline auto-injector (AAI) or to administer VIT. Under certain conditions, VIT can be administered even in the presence of previous grade I anaphylaxis, e.g., if there are additional risk factors or if quality of life would be reduced without VIT. Physicians should be aware of the contraindications to VIT, although they can be overridden in justified individual cases after weighing benefits and risks. The use of ß-blockers and ACE inhibitors is not a contraindication to VIT. Patients should be informed about possible interactions. For VIT, the venom extract shall be used that, according to the patient's history and the results of the allergy diagnostics, was the trigger of the disease. If, in the case of double sensitization and an unclear history regarding the trigger, it is not possible to determine the culprit venom even with additional diagnostic procedures, VIT shall be performed with both venom extracts. The standard maintenance dose of VIT is 100 µg HV. In adult patients with bee venom allergy and an increased risk of sting exposure or particularly severe anaphylaxis, a maintenance dose of 200 µg can be considered from the start of VIT. Administration of a non-sedating H1-blocking antihistamine can be considered to reduce side effects. The maintenance dose should be given at 4-weekly intervals during the first year and, following the manufacturer's instructions, every 5 - 6 weeks from the second year, depending on the preparation used; if a depot preparation is used, the interval can be extended to 8 weeks from the third year onwards. If significant recurrent systemic reactions occur during VIT, clinicians shall identify and as possible eliminate co-factors that promote these reactions. If this is not possible or if there are no such co-factors, if prophylactic administration of an H1-blocking antihistamine is not effective, and if a higher dose of VIT has not led to tolerability of VIT, physicians should should consider additional treatment with an anti IgE antibody such as omalizumab as off lable use. For practical reasons, only a small number of patients are able to undergo sting challenge tests to check the success of the therapy, which requires in-hospital monitoring and emergency standby. To perform such a provocation test, patients must have tolerated VIT at the planned maintenance dose. In the event of treatment failure while on treatment with an ACE inhibitor, physicians should consider discontinuing the ACE inhibitor. In the absence of tolerance induction, physicians shall increase the maintenance dose (200 µg to a maximum of 400 µg in adults, maximum of 200 µg HV in children). If increasing the maintenance dose does not provide adequate protection and there are risk factors for a severe anaphylactic reaction, physicians should consider a co-medication based on an anti-IgE antibody (omalizumab; off-label use) during the insect flight season. In patients without specific risk factors, VIT can be discontinued after 3 - 5 years if maintenance therapy has been tolerated without recurrent anaphylactic events. Prolonged or permanent VIT can be considered in patients with mastocytosis, a history of cardiovascular or respiratory arrest due to Hymenoptera sting (severity grade IV), or other specific constellations associated with an increased individual risk of recurrent and/or severe SAR (e.g., hereditary α-tryptasemia). In cases of strongly increased, unavoidable insect exposure, adults may receive VIT until the end of intense contact. The prescription of an AAI can be omitted in patients with a history of SAR grade I and II when the maintenance dose of VIT has been reached and tolerated, provided that there are no additional risk factors. The same holds true once the VIT has been terminated after the regular treatment period. Patients with a history of SAR grade ≥ III reaction, or grade II reaction combined with additional factors that increase the risk of non response or repeated severe sting reactions, should carry an emergency kit, including an AAI, during VIT and after regular termination of the VIT.

Indications and Outcomes of Patients Receiving Therapeutic Plasma Exchange under Critical Care Conditions: A Retrospective Eleven-Year Single-Center Study at a Tertiary Care Center.

Background: Therapeutic plasma exchange (TPE) is frequently performed in critical care settings for heterogenous indications. However, specific intensive care unit (ICU) data regarding TPE indications, patient characteristics and technical details are sparse. Methods: We performed a retrospective, single-center study using data from January 2010 until August 2021 for patients treated with TPE in an ICU setting at the University Hospital Zurich. Data collected included patient characteristics and outcomes, ICU-specific parameters, as well as apheresis-specific technical parameters and complications. Results: We identified n = 105 patients receiving n = 408 TPEs for n = 24 indications during the study period. The most common was thrombotic microangiopathies (TMA) (38%), transplant-associated complications (16.3%) and vasculitis (14%). One-third of indications (35.2%) could not be classified according to ASFA. Anaphylaxis was the most common TPE-related complication (6.7%), while bleeding complications were rare (1%). The median duration of ICU stay was 8 ± 14 days. Ventilator support, renal replacement therapy or vasopressors were required in 59 (56.2%), 26 (24.8%), and 35 (33.3%) patients, respectively, and 6 (5.7%) patients required extracorporeal membrane oxygenation. The overall hospital survival rate was 88.6%. Conclusion: Our study provides valuable real-world data on heterogenous TPE indications for patients in the ICU setting, potentially supporting decision-making.

Health Care Workers' Sick Leave due to COVID-19 Vaccination in Context With SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Quarantine-A Multicenter Cross-Sectional Survey.

Background: Reactogenicity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccines can result in inability to work. The object of this study was to evaluate health care workers' sick leave after COVID-19 vaccination and to compare it with sick leave due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and quarantine leave. Methods: A multicenter cross-sectional survey was conducted at Regensburg University Medical Center and 10 teaching hospitals in South-East Germany from July 28 to October 15, 2021. Results: Of 2662 participants, 2309 (91.8%) were fully vaccinated without a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection. Sick leave after first/second vaccination occurred in 239 (10.4%) and 539 (23.3%) participants. In multivariable logistic regression, the adjusted odds ratio for sick leave after first/second vaccination compared with BNT162b2 was 2.26/3.72 for mRNA-1237 (95% CI, 1.28-4.01/1.99-6.96) and 27.82/0.48 for ChAdOx1-S (95% CI, 19.12-40.48/0.24-0.96). The actual median sick leave (interquartile range [IQR]) was 1 (0-2) day after any vaccination. Two hundred fifty-one participants (9.4%) reported a history of SARS-CoV-2 infection (median sick leave [IQR] 14 [10-21] days), 353 (13.3%) were quarantined at least once (median quarantine leave [IQR], 14 [10-14] days). Sick leave due to SARS-CoV-2 infection (4642 days) and quarantine leave (4710 days) accounted for 7.7 times more loss of workforce than actual sick leave after first and second vaccination (1216 days) in all fully vaccinated participants. Conclusions: Sick leave after COVID-19 vaccination is frequent and is associated with the vaccine applied. COVID-19 vaccination should reduce the much higher proportion of loss of workforce due to SARS-CoV-2 infection and quarantine.

[Hymenoptera venom allergy]. / Insektengiftallergie: Die am häufigsten zum Tode führende Anaphylaxie.

Allergic reactions caused by sting of honeybees or wasps are very often and make also very severe anaphylactic reaction, up to 3,5 % of population. Mostly sting reactions are dependent to IgE induced reactions type I.Established are history, skin tests and specific IgE antibodies. Recombinant antibodies complete diagnostics in special cases. Specific immunotherapy is recommended as a very successful therapy in treating allergies due to honeybees and wasps. Many protocols are established, the standard maintenance dose is 100 mg. The hyposensitization is very successful with rates of nearly 100 % success. In most times a dose of 100 mg is sufficient, in some cases the dose must be increased to 200 mg. In most patients immunotherapy can be stopped after 3-5 years. Sting challenge tests should be done for proving the efficiency of immunotherapy. Many patients after immunotherapy have an improved live quality after sting provocations.

Immediate-type hypersensitivity to succinylated corticosteroids.

BACKGROUND: Despite their frequent use, systemic corticosteroids have rarely elicited immediate-type reactions. OBJECTIVE: We report two male patients, aged 26 and 70 years, respectively, with severe immediate-type hypersensitivity secondary to the administration of corticosteroids esterified with succinate. METHODS: Skin tests, basophil activation tests and challenge tests were performed for diagnostic evaluation. RESULTS: In both patients, immediate-type skin test reactions were found to methylprednisolone sodium hemisuccinate (MSH) and prednisolone sodium hemisuccinate (PSH). In contrast, nonsuccinylated corticosteroids (including methylprednisolone and prednisolone in one patient) yielded no test reactions. Basophils from one patient exhibited a stimulated expression of the activation marker CD63 upon in vitro incubation with PSH or hydrocortisone sodium succinate, but not with hydrocortisone. Skin tests and basophil activation tests were negative in controls. One patient was challenged with the incriminated drugs. He developed flush, conjunctivitis, tachycardia and dyspnea 2 min after injection of MSH, and dyspnea shortly after intravenous administration of PSH. Oral and intravenous challenge tests with nonsuccinylated corticosteroids were tolerated well by both patients. CONCLUSIONS: These case reports should alert clinicians to rare, but severe immediate-type reactions to corticosteroids, related to the succinate moiety in our patients. In case of allergic reactions to corticosteroids, it is mandatory to identify the causative agent and find safe alternatives.