Anaphylaxis in the community setting: determining risk factors for admission.

BACKGROUND: Although the identification and management of anaphylaxis in an emergency department setting has been well studied, our understanding of the risk factors for admission in a community-based hospital is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To determine the demographics and the predictors of hospitalization, in patients presenting with anaphylaxis to a community-based emergency department (ED). METHODS: We performed a five-year retrospective chart review of all patients seen in the ED of Winthrop University Hospital, a community-based institution, with an International Classification of Diseases, 9(th)Edition code related to anaphylaxis. RESULTS: Fifty-eight visits met inclusion criteria, of which 34% resulted in hospital admission (95% CI: 22-48%). Univariate predictors for admission included (1) the involvement of 2, 3, and 4 organ systems (26%, 55%, and 75%, respectively; P < .02); (2) gastrointestinal symptoms vs no symptoms (59% vs 24%, P < .02); (3) non-sting (ingested and other allergens) vs insect sting allergen (50% vs 12.5%, P < .005); and (4) a history of an ED visit for anaphylaxis vs none (67% vs 30%, P < .05). Multivariate analysis (logistic regression) confirmed non-sting allergens (p < 0.02) and number of organ systems involved (P < .05) as independent predictors of hospitalization. CONCLUSION: In our study population, the involvement of multiple organ systems, particularly gastrointestinal involvement, a history of ED visits for anaphylaxis, and involvement of ingested or other allergens (non-sting) demonstrated higher admission rates.

A multi-center, retrospective review of patch testing for contact dermatitis in allergy practices.

BACKGROUND: Studies assessing patch testing (PT) in allergy practices are limited. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether PT results using a limited panel of allergens such as in the Thin-Layer Rapid-Use Epicutaneous Test (TT) as compared with an expanded panel, such as the addition of supplemental allergens (North American Contact Dermatitis [NACD] Panel, Dormer Cosmetics, hairdressing series, corticosteroid series, and personal products) will miss a significant number of positive PTs. To compare our PT results with published data from dermatology practices. METHODS: This is a 5-year multicenter retrospective chart review of PT at 3 separate allergy practices. RESULTS: Four hundred twenty-seven patients (mean age, 49.8 years) were patch tested. Eighty-two percent were female; 54% reported an atopic history. Of the standardized allergens, the 5 most common positives were nickel sulfate, fragrance mix I, p-phenylenediamine (PPD), thimerosal, and cobalt chloride. Two hundred eighteen (56.9%; 95% CI = 51.9-61.8%) patients were positive to at least 1 TT allergen. Ninety-eight (25.6%; 95% CI = 21.5-30.2%) patients were positive to both a TT and a supplemental allergen. Forty-eight (12.5%; 95% CI = 9.6-16.2%) patients were negative to a TT allergen but positive to a supplemental allergen. CONCLUSION: Positive allergens would have been missed in 12.5% of patients when evaluating with TT allergens alone, whereas 25.6% would be partially evaluated. Patch test performance characteristics for these allergy practices appear to parallel that seen for dermatology. The TT remains an adequate screening tool in an allergy practice, but a more comprehensive panel may be needed to fully evaluate contact dermatitis.

An approach to natalizumab hypersensitivity: a case series of induction of tolerance.

Induction of tolerance protocols have been applied successfully to manage allergic reactions to many medications. Hypersensitivity reactions to natalizumab (TYSABRI®) have been recognized as a growing problem. In circumstances where a hypersensitivity reaction to a medication has occurred, but no suitable alternative exists, drug induction of tolerance protocols may be considered. Drug induction of tolerance protocols were performed in three patients with prior hypersensitivity reactions to natalizumab. All three patients tolerated the protocol without adverse reactions, allowing for the safe reintroduction of natalizumab. To conclude, this case series demonstrates success with an induction of tolerance procedure to a highly effective biological agent for multiple sclerosis, in patients with allergic reactions to natalizumab.