British Society for Immunology and United Kingdom Primary Immunodeficiency Network (UKPIN) consensus guideline for the management of immunoglobulin replacement therapy.

Currently, there is no guideline to support the use of immunoglobulin replacement therapy (IgRT) in primary and secondary immunodeficiency disorders in UK. The UK Primary Immunodeficiency Network (UK-PIN) and the British Society of Immunology (BSI) joined forces to address this need. Given the paucity of evidence, a modified Delphi approach was used covering statements for the initiation, monitoring, discontinuation of IgRT as well as home therapy programme. A group of six consultant immunologists and three nurse specialists created the statements, reviewed responses and feedback and agreed on final recommendations. This guideline includes 22 statements for initiation, 22 statements for monitoring, 11 statement for home therapy, and 19 statements for discontinuation of IgRT. Further areas of research are proposed to improve future delivery of care.

British Society for Immunology/United Kingdom Primary Immunodeficiency Network consensus statement on managing non-infectious complications of common variable immunodeficiency disorders.

Common variable immunodeficiency (CVID) represents a heterogeneous group of rare disorders. There is considerable morbidity and mortality as a result of non-infectious complications, and this presents clinicians with management challenges. Clinical guidelines to support the management of CVID are urgently required. The UK Primary Immunodeficiency Network and the British Society for Immunology funded a joint project to address this. A modified Delphi Survey was conducted for the assessment, diagnosis and treatment of the non-infectious blood, respiratory, gut and liver complications of CVID. A steering group of 10 consultant immunologists and one nurse specialist developed and reviewed the survey statements and agreed the final recommendations. In total, 22 recommendations and three areas for research were developed.

Management of a surgical patient with a label of penicillin allergy: narrative review and consensus recommendations.

Unsubstantiated penicillin-allergy labels are common in surgical patients, and can lead to significant harm through avoidance of best first-line prophylaxis of surgical site infections and increased infection with resistant bacterial strains. Up to 98% of penicillin-allergy labels are incorrect when tested. Because of the scarcity of trained allergists in all healthcare systems, only a minority of surgical patients have the opportunity to undergo testing and de-labelling before surgery. Testing pathways can be modified and shortened in selected patients. A variety of healthcare professionals can, with appropriate training and in collaboration with allergists, provide testing for selected patients. We review how patients might be assessed, the appropriate testing strategies that can be used, and the minimum standards of safe testing.

Consensus clinical scoring for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions.

BACKGROUND: Grading schemes for severity of suspected allergic reactions have been applied to the perioperative setting, but there is no scoring system that estimates the likelihood that the reaction is an immediate hypersensitivity reaction. Such a score would be useful in evaluating current and proposed tests for the diagnosis of suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions and culprit agents. METHODS: We conducted a Delphi consensus process involving a panel of 25 international multidisciplinary experts in suspected perioperative allergy. Items were ranked according to appropriateness (on a scale of 1-9) and consensus, which informed development of a clinical scoring system. The scoring system was assessed by comparing scores generated for a series of clinical scenarios against ratings of panel members. Supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase were generated. RESULTS: Two rounds of the Delphi process achieved stopping criteria for all statements. From an initial 60 statements, 43 were rated appropriate (median score 7 or more) and met agreement criteria (disagreement index <0.5); these were used in the clinical scoring system. The rating of clinical scenarios supported the validity of the scoring system. Although there was variability in the interpretation of changes in mast cell tryptase by the panel, we were able to include supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase. CONCLUSION: We used a robust consensus development process to devise a clinical scoring system for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions. This will enable objectivity and uniformity in the assessment of the sensitivity of diagnostic tests.

The United Kingdom Primary Immune Deficiency (UKPID) registry 2012 to 2017.

This is the second report of the United Kingdom Primary Immunodeficiency (UKPID) registry. The registry will be a decade old in 2018 and, as of August 2017, had recruited 4758 patients encompassing 97% of immunology centres within the United Kingdom. This represents a doubling of recruitment into the registry since we reported on 2229 patients included in our first report of 2013. Minimum PID prevalence in the United Kingdom is currently 5·90/100 000 and an average incidence of PID between 1980 and 2000 of 7·6 cases per 100 000 UK live births. Data are presented on the frequency of diseases recorded, disease prevalence, diagnostic delay and treatment modality, including haematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) and gene therapy. The registry provides valuable information to clinicians, researchers, service commissioners and industry alike on PID within the United Kingdom, which may not otherwise be available without the existence of a well-established registry.

Specialist perioperative allergy clinic services in the UK 2018: Results from the Royal College of Anaesthetists Sixth National Audit Project (NAP6) investigation of perioperative anaphylaxis.

BACKGROUND: The Royal College of Anaesthetists 6th National Audit Project examined Grade 3-5 perioperative anaphylaxis for 1 year in the UK. OBJECTIVE: To describe the causes and investigation of anaphylaxis in the NAP6 cohort, in relation to published guidance and previous baseline survey results. METHODS: We used a secure registry to gather details of Grade 3-5 perioperative anaphylaxis. Anonymous reports were aggregated for analysis and reviewed in detail. Panel consensus diagnosis, reaction grade, review of investigations and clinic assessment are reported and compared to the prior NAP6 baseline clinic survey. RESULTS: A total of 266 cases met inclusion criteria between November 2015 and 2016, detailing reactions and investigations. One hundred and ninety-two of 266 (72%) had anaphylaxis with a trigger identified, of which 140/192 (75%) met NAP6 criteria for IgE-mediated allergic anaphylaxis, 13% lacking evidence of positive IgE tests were labelled "non-allergic anaphylaxis". 3% were non-IgE-mediated anaphylaxis. Adherence to guidance was similar to the baseline survey for waiting time for clinic assessment. However, lack of testing for chlorhexidine and latex, non-harmonized testing practices and poor coverage of all possible culprits was confirmed. Challenge testing may be underused and many have unacceptably delayed assessments, even in urgent cases. Communication or information provision for patients was insufficient, especially for avoidance advice and communication of test results. Insufficient detail regarding skin test methods was available to draw conclusions regarding techniques. CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Current clinical assessment in the UK is effective but harmonization of approach to testing, access to services and MHRA reporting is needed. Expert anaesthetist involvement should increase to optimize diagnostic yield and advice for future anaesthesia. Dynamic tryptase evaluation improves detection of tryptase release where peak tryptase is <14 µg/L and should be adopted. Standardized clinic reports containing appropriate details of tests, conclusions, avoidance, cross-reactivity and suitable alternatives are required to ensure effective, safe future management options.

Anaesthesia, surgery, and life-threatening allergic reactions: epidemiology and clinical features of perioperative anaphylaxis in the 6th National Audit Project (NAP6).

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis during anaesthesia is a serious complication for patients and anaesthetists. METHODS: The 6th National Audit Project (NAP6) on perioperative anaphylaxis collected and reviewed 266 reports of Grades 3-5 anaphylaxis over 1 yr from all NHS hospitals in the UK. RESULTS: The estimated incidence was ≈1:10 000 anaesthetics. Case exclusion because of reporting delays or incomplete data means true incidence might be ≈70% higher. The distribution of 199 identified culprit agents included antibiotics (94), neuromuscular blocking agents (65), chlorhexidine (18), and Patent Blue dye (9). Teicoplanin comprised 12% of antibiotic exposures, but caused 38% of antibiotic-induced anaphylaxis. Eighteen patients reacted to an antibiotic test dose. Succinylcholine-induced anaphylaxis, mainly presenting with bronchospasm, was two-fold more likely than other neuromuscular blocking agents. Atracurium-induced anaphylaxis mainly presented with hypotension. Non-depolarising neuromuscular blocking agents had similar incidences to each other. There were no reports of local anaesthetic or latex-induced anaphylaxis. The commonest presenting features were hypotension (46%), bronchospasm (18%), tachycardia (9.8%), oxygen desaturation (4.7%), bradycardia (3%), and reduced/absent capnography trace (2.3%). All patients were hypotensive during the episode. Onset was rapid for neuromuscular blocking agents and antibiotics, but delayed with chlorhexidine and Patent Blue dye. There were 10 deaths and 40 cardiac arrests. Pulseless electrical activity was the usual type of cardiac arrest, often with bradycardia. Poor outcomes were associated with increased ASA, obesity, beta blocker, and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor medication. Seventy per cent of cases were reported to the hospital incident reporting system, and only 24% to Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency via the Yellow Card Scheme. CONCLUSIONS: The overall incidence of perioperative anaphylaxis was estimated to be 1 in 10 000 anaesthetics.

Cross-sectional study of perioperative drug and allergen exposure in UK practice in 2016: the 6th National Audit Project (NAP6) Allergen Survey.

BACKGROUND: Details of the current UK drug and allergen exposure were needed for interpretation of reports of perioperative anaphylaxis to the 6th National Audit Project (NAP6). METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional survey of 356 NHS hospitals determining anaesthetic drug usage in October 2016. All cases cared for by an anaesthetist were included. RESULTS: Responses were received from 342 (96%) hospitals. Within-hospital return rates were 96%. We collected 15 942 forms, equating to an annual caseload of 3.1 million, including 2.4 million general anaesthetics. Propofol was used in 74% of all cases and 90% of general anaesthetics. Maintenance included a volatile agent in 95% and propofol in 8.7%. Neuromuscular blocking agents were used in 47% of general anaesthetics. Analgesics were used in 88% of cases: opioids, 82%; paracetamol, 56%; and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 28%. Antibiotics were administered in 57% of cases, including 2.5 million annual perioperative administrations; gentamicin, co-amoxiclav, and cefuroxime were most commonly used. Local anaesthetics were used in 74% cases and 70% of general anaesthetics. Anti-emetics were used in 73% of cases: during general anaesthesia, ondansetron in 78% and dexamethasone in 60%. Blood products were used in ≈3% of cases, gelatin <2%, starch very rarely, and tranexamic acid in ≈6%. Chlorhexidine and povidone-iodine exposures were 74% and 40% of cases, and 21% reported a latex-free environment. Exposures to bone cement, blue dyes, and radiographic contrast dye were each reported in 2-3% of cases. CONCLUSIONS: This survey provides insights into allergen exposures in perioperative care, which is important as denominator data for the NAP6 registry.

Anaesthesia, surgery, and life-threatening allergic reactions: management and outcomes in the 6th National Audit Project (NAP6).

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis during anaesthesia is a serious complication for patients and anaesthetists. There is little published information on management and outcomes of perioperative anaphylaxis in the UK. METHODS: The 6th National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists (NAP6) collected and reviewed 266 reports of Grade 3-5 anaphylaxis from all UK NHS hospitals over 1 yr. Quality of management was assessed against published guidelines. RESULTS: Appropriately senior anaesthetists resuscitated all patients. Immediate management was 'good' in 46% and 'poor' in 15%. Recognition and treatment of anaphylaxis were prompt in 97% and 83% of cases, respectively. Epinephrine was administered i.v. in 76%, i.m. in 14%, both in 6%, and not at all in 11% of cases. A catecholamine infusion was administered in half of cases. Cardiac arrests (40 cases; 15%) were promptly treated but cardiac compressions were omitted in half of patients with unrecordable BP. The surgical procedure was abandoned in most cases, including 10% where surgery was urgent. Of 54% admitted to critical care, 70% were level 3, with most requiring catecholamine infusions. Ten (3.8%) patents (mostly elderly with cardiovascular disease) died from anaphylaxis. Corticosteroids and antihistamines were generally administered early. We found no clear evidence of harm or benefit from chlorphenamine. Two patients received vasopressin and one glucagon. Fluid administration was inadequate in 19% of cases. Treatment included sugammadex in 19 cases, including one when rocuronium had not been administered. Adverse sequelae (psychological, cognitive, or physical) were reported in one-third of cases. CONCLUSIONS: Management of perioperative anaphylaxis could be improved, especially with respect to administration of epinephrine, cardiac compressions, and i.v. fluid. Sequelae were common.

An observational national study of anaesthetic workload and seniority across the working week and weekend in the UK in 2016: the 6th National Audit Project (NAP6) Activity Survey.

BACKGROUND: UK national anaesthetic activity was studied in 2013 but weekend working was not examined. Understanding changes since 2013 in workload and manpower distribution, including weekends, would be of value in workforce planning. METHODS: We performed an observational survey of NHS hospitals' anaesthetic practice in October 2016 as part of the 6th National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists (NAP6). All cases cared for by an anaesthetist during the study period were included. Patient characteristics and details of anaesthetic conduct were collected by local anaesthetists. RESULTS: Responses were received from 342/356 (96%) hospitals. In total, 15 942 cases were reported, equating to an annual anaesthetic workload of ≈3.13 million cases. Approximately 95% (9888/10 452) of elective and 72% (3184/4392) of emergency work was performed on weekdays and 89% (14 145/15 942) of activity was led by senior (consultant or career grade) anaesthetists and 1.1% (180/15942) by those with <2 yr anaesthetic experience. During weekends case urgency increased, the proportion of healthy patients reduced and case mix changed. Cases led by senior anaesthetists fell to 80% (947/1177) on Saturday and 66% (342/791) on Sunday. Senior involvement in obstetric anaesthetic activity was 69% (628/911) during the week and 45% (182/402) at weekends, compared with 93% (791/847) in emergency orthopaedic procedures during the week and 89% (285/321) at weekends. Since 2013, the proportion of obese patients, elective weekend working, and depth of anaesthesia monitoring has increased [12% (1464/12 213) vs 2.8%], but neuromuscular monitoring has not [37% (2032/5532) vs 38% of paralysed cases]. CONCLUSIONS: Senior clinicians deliver most UK anaesthesia care, including at weekends. Our findings are important for any planned workforce reorganisation to rationalise 7-day working.

Anaesthesia, surgery, and life-threatening allergic reactions: protocol and methods of the 6th National Audit Project (NAP6) of the Royal College of Anaesthetists.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis during anaesthesia is a serious complication for patients and anaesthetists. METHODS: The Sixth National Audit Project (NAP6) of the Royal College of Anaesthetists examined the incidence, predisposing factors, management, and impact of life-threatening perioperative anaphylaxis in the UK. NAP6 included: a national survey of anaesthetists' experiences and perceptions; a national survey of allergy clinics; a registry collecting detailed reports of all Grade 3-5 perioperative anaphylaxis cases for 1 yr; and a national survey of anaesthetic workload and perioperative allergen exposure. NHS and independent sector (IS) hospitals were approached to participate. Cases were reviewed by a multi-disciplinary expert panel (anaesthetists, intensivists, allergists, immunologists, patient representatives, and stakeholders) using a structured process designed to minimise bias. Clinical management and investigation were compared with published guidelines. This paper describes detailed study methods and reports on project engagement by NHS and IS hospitals. The methodology includes a new classification of perioperative anaphylaxis and a new structured method for classifying suspected anaphylactic events including the degree of certainty with which a causal trigger agent can be attributed. RESULTS: NHS engagement was complete (100% of hospitals). Independent sector engagement was limited (13% of approached hospitals). We received >500 reports of Grade 3-5 perioperative anaphylaxis, with 266 suitable for analysis. We identified 199 definite or probable culprit agents in 192 cases. CONCLUSIONS: The methods of NAP6 were robust in identifying causative agents of anaphylaxis, and support the accompanying analytical papers.

Chlorhexidine allergy in four specialist allergy centres in the United Kingdom, 2009-13: clinical features and diagnostic tests.

We describe an observational survey of diagnostic pathways in 104 patients attending four specialist allergy clinics in the United Kingdom following perioperative hypersensitivity reactions to chlorhexidine reactions. The majority were life-threatening. Men undergoing urological or cardiothoracic surgery predominated. Skin prick testing and specific immunoglobulin (sIg)E testing were the most common tests used for diagnosis. Fifty-three per cent of diagnoses were made on the basis of a single positive test. Where multiple tests were performed the sensitivity of intradermal, basophil activation and skin prick testing was 68% (50-86%), 50% (10-90%) and 35% (17-55%), respectively. Seven per cent were negative on screening tests initially, and 12 cases were only positive for a single test despite multiple testing. Intradermal tests appeared most sensitive in this context. Additional sensitization to other substances used perioperatively, particularly neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA), was found in 28 patients, emphasizing the need to test for possible allergy to all drugs to which the patient was exposed even where chlorhexidine is positive.

Specialist perioperative allergy clinic services in the UK 2016: Results from the Royal College of Anaesthetists Sixth National Audit Project.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines for investigation of perioperative drug allergy exist, but the quality of services is unknown. Specialist perioperative anaphylaxis services were surveyed through the Royal College of Anaesthetists 6th National Audit Project. OBJECTIVES: We compare self-declared UK practice in specialist perioperative allergy services with national recommendations. METHODS: A SurveyMonkey™ questionnaire was distributed to providers of allergy services in the UK. Responses were assessed for adherence to the best practice recommendations of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI), the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland and the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) Guidance on Drug Allergy-CG183. RESULTS: Over 1200 patients were evaluated in 44 centres annually. Variation in workload, waiting times, access, staffing and diagnostic approach was noted. Paediatric centres had the longest routine waiting times (most wait >13 weeks) in contrast to adult centres (most wait <12 weeks). Service leads are allergists/immunologists (91%) or anaesthetists (7%). Potentially important differences were seen in: testing repertoire [10/44 (23%) lacked BSACI compliant neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA) panels and 17/44 (39%) lacked a NAP6-defined extended panel; many failed to screen all cases for chlorhexidine 19/44 (43%) or latex 21/44 (48%)], staffing [only 26/44 (59%) had specialist nurses and 18/44 (41%) an anaesthetist] and provision of information [18/44 (41%) gave immediate information in clinic and 5/44 (11%) sign-posted support groups]. Most centres were able to provide diagnostic challenges to antibiotics [40/44 (91%]) and local anaesthetics [41/44 (93%)]. CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Diagnostic testing is not harmonized, with marked variability in the NMBA panels used to identify safe alternatives. Chlorhexidine and latex are not part of routine testing in many centres. Poor access to services and patient information provision require attention. Harmonization of diagnostic approach is desirable, particularly with regard to a minimum NMBA panel for identification of safe alternatives.

Teicoplanin allergy - an emerging problem in the anaesthetic allergy clinic.

BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis to teicoplanin appears to be extremely rare, with only one confirmed case report worldwide. Two anaesthetic allergy clinics in the UK have received a number of suspected cases referred for investigation, and we present here the first case series of teicoplanin allergy. METHODS: We investigated 20 cases of suspected teicoplanin allergy, identified from the two clinics over a period of two years. We devised a set of five criteria to categorize the certainty of their diagnosis. These included: (1) reaction within 15 min of administration of teicoplanin, (2) ≥2 features of anaphylaxis present, (3) positive skin testing or challenge testing, (4) raised serum mast cell tryptase (MCT), (5) alternative diagnosis excluded. Based on these criteria we defined the likelihood of IgE-mediated allergy to teicoplanin as: definite-met all criteria; probable-met criteria 1.2 and 5, plus 3 or 4; uncertain-met criteria 1.2 and 5; excluded- any others. RESULTS: We identified 7 'definite', 7 'probable' and 2 'uncertain' cases of teicoplanin allergy. Four cases were excluded. CONCLUSIONS: IgE-mediated anaphylaxis to teicoplanin appears to be more common than previously thought. This is true even if only definitive cases are considered. Investigation of teicoplanin allergy is hampered by the lack of standardized skin test concentrations. In some cases, there was a severe clinical reaction, but without any skin test evidence of histamine release. The mechanism of reaction in these cases is not known and requires further study.

Treatment of dilated cardiomyopathy in rabbits with mesenchymal stem cell transplantation and platelet-rich plasma.

Dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is a major cause of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity, and there is evidence to suggest that stem cell transplantation may be a viable treatment option for this condition. Therefore, the goal of the present study was to assess myocardial regeneration in rabbits with doxorubicin-induced DCM treated with adipose mesenchymal stem cells (MSC) alone or in combination with platelet-rich plasma (PRP). Twenty New Zealand rabbits received doxorubicin for the induction of DCM and were divided into four groups according to treatment: saline, MSC, PRP and MSC + RP. Treatment agents were injected directly into the left ventricular myocardium following a thoracoscopy. Rabbits were assessed through echocardiographic and electrocardiographic examinations, as well as serum cardiac troponin I measurements at baseline, after the induction of DCM and 15 days after treatment. Animals were euthanased following the last assessment, and hearts were collected for histopathological analyses. The MSC group showed improvements in all parameters assessed, while the PRP group showed significantly impaired heart function. Histopathology of the heart revealed that the MSC group displayed the lowest number of lesions, while rabbits in the MSC + PRP, saline and PRP groups had steadily advancing lesions. These results suggest that MSC transplantation can improve heart function in rabbits with DCM, and underscore the need for further studies of the effects of PRP on the myocardium.

Topical treatment of actinic keratosis with imiquimod 5% cream / Tratamento tópico de ceratose actínica com imiquimod creme 5%

The viability and the efficiency of imiquimod 5% cream in a cat which suffered from nasal actinic keratosis were evaluated. The procedures were carried out at home by the owners themselves. Six packets of the cream were used, one per week, in three consecutive daily applications, with a four-day interval (without treatment). The cytological results were negative for neoplastic cells 30 days after the end of the treatment. A clinical revision was conducted 18 months later and the animal showed no signs of recurrence. The cream proved to be safe and efficient. There are no reports regarding efficiency in animals concerning the treatment with imiquimod 5% cream and also regarding other effects related to this treatment. A case report presenting a positive response can reveal with terapeutical possibilities that it would be easily available and applicable for all professionals. In the future it would be a new alternative to avoid progressions of this kind of neoplasia which is often observed in the small animal clinic.

Avaliaram-se a viabilidade e a eficácia da utilização do imiquimod creme 5% em um gato portador de ceratose actínica nasal. As aplicações foram realizadas no domicílio, pelos proprietários, sendo utilizados seis sachês do creme, um por semana, em protocolo de três aplicações diárias consecutivas e quatro dias de descanso (sem tratamento). Após 30 dias do término do tratamento, obteve-se citologia negativa para células neoplásicas. Em revisão clínica 18 meses após o tratamento, o paciente apresentava-se sem sinais de recidiva. O protocolo mostrou-se seguro e eficaz. Em animais não há relatos sobre a eficácia da terapia com imiquimod, bem como sobre efeitos adversos decorrentes deste tratamento. A apresentação de um caso em que se observou resposta positiva pode descortinar uma nova possibilidade terapêutica, acessível a todo clínico, que poderá evitar a progressão destas neoplasias que são frequentemente observadas na clínica de pequenos animais.