Drug-Induced Anaphylaxis in Latin American Countries.

BACKGROUND: Information regarding the clinical features and management of drug-induced anaphylaxis (DIA) in Latin America is lacking. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess implicated medications, demographics, and treatments received for DIA in Latin American patients referred to national specialty centers for evaluation. METHOD: A database previously used to compile information on drug-induced allergic reactions in 11 Latin American countries was used to identify and characterize patients presenting specifically with a clinical diagnosis of DIA. Information regarding clinical presentation, causative agent(s), diagnostic studies performed, treatment, and contributing factors associated with increased reaction severity was analyzed. RESULTS: There were 1005 patients evaluated for possible drug hypersensitivity reactions during the study interval, and 264 (26.3%) met criteria for DIA. DIA was more frequent in adults and in elderly females (N = 129 [76.6%] and N = 30 [75%], respectively) compared with children and/or adolescents (N = 21 [42.9%], P < .01). Severe DIA was less frequent with underlying asthma (N = 22 vs 35 [38.6% vs 61.4%], P < .05) or atopy (N = 62 vs 71 [43% vs 59% ], P < .01). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (N = 178 [57.8%]), beta-lactam antibiotics (N = 44 [14.3%]), and other antibiotics (N = 16 [5.2%]) were the most frequently implicated drug classes. Anaphylaxis was rated as severe in N = 133 (50.4%) and anaphylactic shock (AS) was present in N = 90 (34.1%). Epinephrine was only used in N = 73 (27.6%) overall, but in N = 70 (77.8%) of patients with AS. CONCLUSION: In Latin American patients referred for evaluation of DIA, NSAIDs and antibiotics were implicated in approximately 80% of cases. Most of these reactions were treated in the emergency department. Epinephrine was administered in only 27.6% of all cases, although more frequently for anaphylactic shock. Dissemination of anaphylaxis guidelines among emergency department physicians should be encouraged to improve management of DIA.

Multinational experience with hypersensitivity drug reactions in Latin America.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiologic drug allergy data from Latin America are scarce, and there are no studies on specific procedures focusing on this topic in Latin America. OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical characteristics and management of hypersensitivity drug reactions in different Latin American countries. METHODS: An European Network of Drug Allergy questionnaire survey was implemented in 22 allergy units in 11 Latin American countries to report on consecutive patients who presented with a suspected hypersensitivity drug reaction. Each unit used its own protocols to investigate patients. RESULTS: Included were 868 hypersensitivity drug reactions in 862 patients (71% of adults and elderly patients were women and 51% of children were girls, P = .0001). Children presented with less severe reactions than adults and elderly patients (P < .0001). Urticaria and angioedema accounted for the most frequent clinical presentations (71%), whereas anaphylaxis was present in 27.3% of cases. There were no deaths reported. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (52.3%), ß-lactam antibiotics (13.8%), and other antibiotics (10.1%) were the drugs used most frequently. Skin prick tests (16.7%) and provocation tests (34.2%) were the study procedures most commonly used. A large proportion of patients were treated in the emergency department (62%) with antihistamines (68%) and/or corticosteroids (53%). Only 22.8% of patients presenting with anaphylaxis received epinephrine. CONCLUSION: Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and antibiotics were the drugs used in at least 75% of patients. More than half the reactions were treated in the emergency department, whereas epinephrine was administered in fewer than 25% of patients with anaphylaxis. Dissemination of guidelines for anaphylaxis among primary and emergency department physicians should be encouraged.