Early skin and challenge testing after rocuronium anaphylaxis.

We present a case of early skin and challenge testing in a patient following severe anaphylaxis to rocuronium. The patient presented for semi-elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy and developed anaphylaxis with severe cardiovascular collapse after induction of anaesthesia. Surgery was cancelled but was considered necessary before the recommended four to six weeks for formal allergy testing. Limited skin and challenge testing was performed to rocuronium and cisatracurium while the patient was in the intensive care unit to identify a safe neuromuscular blocking drug for subsequent early surgery. The subsequent surgery, 48 hours after the initial reaction, was uneventful. The case highlights the difficulties when anaesthetising patients with recent anaphylaxis who have not yet had formal allergy testing and presents a potential management strategy involving early skin testing.

Failure to investigate anaesthetic anaphylaxis resulting in a preventable second anaphylactic reaction.

We present a case of anaphylaxis to suxamethonium and/or vecuronium in a patient who had previously suffered an anaphylactic reaction, presumably to rocuronium. The patient had not been referred for formal allergy testing after the first anaphylactic reaction. Subsequent formal allergy testing revealed sensitivities to suxamethonium, rocuronium and vecuronium. Her next anaesthetic, using cisatracurium, was uneventful. It is recommended that all patients with suspected perioperative anaphylaxis are referred for testing. This is the responsibility of the anaesthetist. Particular caution should be used with suspected neuromuscular blocking drug allergy as cross-reactivity is common and not predictable by drug structure.

The cyclodextrin sugammadex and anaphylaxis to rocuronium: is rocuronium still potentially allergenic in the inclusion complex form?

Rocuronium, a non-depolarizing neuromuscular blocking drug has a rapid onset of action, a comparatively low potency and, with a more favourable side effects profile than succinylcholine, it has become a popular alternative to that drug for rapid sequence inductions in anaesthesia. The rocuronium-binding cyclodextrin derivative sugammadex, prepared by per-6 substitution of the primary hydroxyls of γ-cyclodextrin with thiol ether-linked propionic acid side chains to extend the hydrophobic cavity to accommodate rocuronium, is used to reverse neuromuscular blockade by encapsulating the drug as an inclusion complex and removing it from the neuromuscular junction to the plasma. It has recently been suggested that sugammadex might also be of value in the management of rocuronium-induced anaphylaxis and this has been potentially supported by recent case reports. However, before sugammadex can be recommended for this purpose, it is important to establish whether or not the allergenic substituted ammonium groups at each end of the rocuronium molecule in the inclusion complex are masked within the cavity or left exposed for interaction with rocuronium-reactive IgE antibodies in the sera of rocuronium-allergic patients. Detailed experimental strategies and experimental protocols to investigate the allergenic potential of the sugammadex-rocuronium inclusion complex are presented and a possible explanation of the apparently rapid and successful reversal of anaphylaxis by administration of sugammadex is advanced and discussed.

Drug-specific cyclodextrins with emphasis on sugammadex, the neuromuscular blocker rocuronium and perioperative anaphylaxis: implications for drug allergy.

Cyclodextrins, oligosaccharides linked in a circular arrangement around a central cavity, are used extensively in the pharmaceutical industry to improve drug delivery. Their usefulness depends on their capacity to form a drug inclusion, or host-guest, complex within the cavity. In an attempt to improve the delivery of the widely used neuromuscular blocking drug (NMBD) rocuronium, a rocuronium inclusion complex was formed with a chemically modified γ-cyclodextrin. The high binding affinity and specificity of the modified carrier (named sugammadex) for rocuronium (and other aminosteroid NMBDs) led to its use in anaesthesia as an innovative and useful agent for rapid reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular block by sequestering the drug as an inclusion complex. This, in turn, led to the suggestion that sugammadex might be useful to remove the NMBD from the circulation of patients experiencing rocuronium-induced anaphylaxis, a suggestion subsequently supported in case reports where traditional treatment had failed. Successful resuscitations suggested that sugammadex might be a valuable new treatment for such intractable cases but, given the inappropriateness of clinical trials, confirmation or refutation will have to await the slow accumulation of results of individual case reports. Important questions related to antibody accessibility of drug allergenic structures on the rocuronium-sugammadex inclusion complex, and the competition between sugammadex and IgE antibodies (both free and cell bound) for rocuronium, also remain and can be investigated in vitro. The sugammadex findings indicate that the use of carrier molecules such as the cyclodextrins to improve drug delivery will sometimes give rise to changed immunologic and allergenic behaviour of some drugs and this will have to be taken into account in preclinical drug safety assessments of drug-carrier complexes. The possibility of encapsulating and removing other allergenic drugs, e.g., penicillins and cephalosporins, in cases of difficult-to-reverse anaphylaxis to these drugs is discussed.

Allergy to rocuronium: from clinical suspicion to correct diagnosis.

BACKGROUND: Allergy to rocuronium can be life-threatening. Correct diagnosis is a prerequisite because of serious consequences of diagnostic error. OBJECTIVE: To assess skin testing, quantification of specific IgE (sIgE) and flow-assisted activation of basophils [basophil activation test (BAT)] in the diagnosis of rocuronium allergy. METHODS: This study comprises 104 curarized patients with a history of profound hypotension and severe bronchospasm immediately after induction of anaesthesia. All patients had skin tests, quantification of sIgE and BAT to rocuronium, together with investigations for all relevant compounds administered during anaesthesia that could have evoked the reaction. Diagnosis of rocuronium allergy was considered definite when the patient demonstrated a positive outcome for at least two of the three aforementioned tests. RESULTS: The positive predictive value for skin testing, BAT and sIgE was 98% (CI 95%: 92-99%), 97% (CI 95%: 88-100%) and 83% (CI 95%: 74-89%), respectively. The negative predictive value for skin testing, BAT and sIgE was 96% (CI 95%: 86-99%), 75% (CI 95%: 67-75%) and 72% (CI 95%: 58-83%), respectively. Cross-reactivity with vecuronium was documented in 69% of the patients. CONCLUSION: Skin testing merits the status of primary diagnostic investigation to document rocuronium allergy and cannot be substituted by quantification of sIgE or BAT. SIgE can offer a diagnostic advantage in cases where skin tests yield negative results. However, additional tests (e.g. BAT) are of capital importance in patients with negative skin tests and positive sIgE results to help in interpreting the clinical significance of a positive sIgE result. Optimal assessment of cross-reactivity between rocuronium and vecuronium implies both skin testing and BAT.

Differentiating the cellular and humoral components of neuromuscular blocking agent-induced anaphylactic reactions in patients undergoing anaesthesia.

BACKGROUND: The significance of IgE antibodies to neuromuscular blocking agent (NMBA)-induced anaphylactic reactions during anaesthesia is unclear. We investigated the relevance of IgE to rocuronium using an in vitro technique. METHODS: Serum samples from 61 patients with anaphylactic reactions during anaesthesia were investigated. On the basis of clinical history, allergy to NMBA was considered likely in 48 patients, further assessed using intradermal skin tests for several commonly used NMBAs, including rocuronium, vecuronium, and succinylcholine. To determine the presence of rocuronium IgE in human serum, a rocuronium-human serum albumin (rocHSA) conjugate was coupled to a solid phase and a radioallergosorbent test performed. The biological effects of patient serum NMBA-IgE on histamine release were investigated using in vitro sensitized basophils from healthy blood donors. RESULTS: IgE to rocuronium was found in 23 of 48 serum samples (48%) with NMBA allergy, although only two of these were able to sensitize basophils to release histamine in response to rocHSA. IgE-responsiveness in the basophil test was only observed with conjugated rocHSA and not with unconjugated rocuronium or the other NMBAs evaluated. However, unconjugated rocuronium inhibited the histamine release induced by rocHSA. Correlation between skin-test reactivity to rocuronium and IgE to rocHSA was low (P>0.1). In contrast, striking correlation between IgE to rocuronium and skin-test reactivity to succinylcholine was found (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that NMBA-related anaphylaxis requires not only IgE NMBA reactivity, but also altered cellular reactivity in the patient. The latter may be demonstrable by testing basophils from the patient, a skin test with (steroidal) NMBA, or both.

Immunoglobulin E antibodies to rocuronium: a new diagnostic tool.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of allergy from neuromuscular blocking agents is not always straightforward. The objectives of the current study were to investigate the value of quantification of immunoglobulin E (IgE) by ImmunoCAP (Phadia AB, Uppsala, Sweden) in the diagnosis of rocuronium allergy and to study whether IgE inhibition tests can predict clinical cross-reactivity between neuromuscular blocking agents. METHODS: Twenty-five rocuronium-allergic patients and 30 control individuals exposed to rocuronium during uneventful anesthesia were included. Thirty-two sera (total IgE > 1,500 kU/l) were analyzed for potential interference of elevated total IgE titers. Results were compared with quantification of IgE for suxamethonium, morphine, and pholcodine. Cross-reactivity between drugs was assessed by IgE inhibition and skin tests. RESULTS: Sensitivity of IgE for rocuronium, suxamethonium, morphine, and pholcodine was 68, 60, 88, and 86%, respectively. Specificity was 100% for suxamethonium, morphine, and pholcodine IgE and 93% for rocuronium IgE. ROC analysis between patients and control individuals changed the threshold to 0.13 kUa/l for rocuronium, 0.11 kUa/l for suxamethonium, 0.36 kUa/l for morphine, and 0.43 kUa/l for pholcodine. Corresponding sensitivity was 92, 72, 88, and 86%, respectively. Specificity was unaltered. Interference of elevated total IgE with quantification of IgE was demonstrated by the analysis in sera with a total IgE greater than 1,500 kU/l. IgE inhibition did not predict clinical relevant cross-reactivity. CONCLUSIONS: The rocuronium ImmunoCAP constitutes a reliable technique to diagnose rocuronium allergy, provided an assay-specific decision threshold is applied. IgE assays based on compounds bearing ammonium epitopes are confirmed to represent reliable tools to diagnose rocuronium allergy. High total IgE titers were observed to affect specificity of the assays.

Flow-assisted diagnostic management of anaphylaxis from rocuronium bromide.

BACKGROUND: Diagnosis of anaphylaxis from neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA) is not always straightforward. OBJECTIVES: To assess flow cytometric analysis of activated basophils (BAT) as a diagnostic instrument in anaphylaxis from rocuronium. To investigate whether the technique might help to identify cross-reactive and safe alternative compounds. METHODS: For validation of the BAT, 14 patients with perioperative anaphylaxis demonstrating a positive skin test (ST) for rocuronium and eight individuals that tolerated rocuronium and a negative ST for this drug were enrolled. To confirm specificity of the BAT, five patients that tolerated atracurium or cisatracurium with a negative ST for rocuronium were tested. Basophil activation with rocuronium, vecuronium, atracurium, cisatracurium and suxamethonium was analysed flow cytometrically by labelling with anti-CD123/anti-HLADR/anti-CD63. RESULTS: Sensitivity of BAT for rocuronium was 91.7% and specificity 100%. However, in two patients the BAT was lost as a diagnostic tool, as their cells were nonresponsive to positive control stimulation and allergen. Seven from the 12 responsive patients also demonstrated a clear basophilic activation for vecuronium. Moreover, according to ST and/or BAT cross-reactivity between rocuronium and vecuronium was suspected in 10/14 patients. Except one patient, all patients had negative BAT and ST investigations for atracurium and cisatracurium. Currently, five patients tolerated administration of cisatracurium. All control individuals demonstrated negative ST and BAT for all tested NMBA. CONCLUSIONS: The BAT constitutes a reliable instrument to diagnose anaphylaxis from rocuronium. The technique also allows quick and simultaneous testing of different potential cross-reactive NMBA and to tailor a safe alternative.

[Allergy investigations after two cases of adverse reactions to a neuromuscular blocking agent and management for subsequent general anaesthesia]. / Bilan allergologique après un choc anaphylactique à un curare non dépolarisant: conduite à tenir pour une anesthésie ultérieure.

We report two cases of severe anaphylactic reactions to rocuronium. Diagnosis was confirmed by skin tests and specific IgE assay. Cross-reactivity to all neuromuscular blocking agents was investigated by intradermal tests and leucocyte histamine release test. Intradermal tests and leukocyte histamine release were negative for cisatracurium. The two patients had undergone a subsequent general anaesthesia using cisatracurium and did not present any adverse reaction.

Rocuronium: high risk for anaphylaxis?

Patients suspected of anaphylaxis during anaesthesia have been referred to the senior author's clinic since 1974 for investigation. Since release of rocuronium on to the worldwide market, concern has been expressed about its propensity to cause anaphylaxis. We identified 24 patients who met clinical and laboratory (intradermal, mast cell tryptase and morphine radioimmunoassay) criteria for anaphylaxis to rocuronium. The incidence of rocuronium allergy in New South Wales, Australia has risen in parallel with sales, while there has been an associated fall in reactions to other neuromuscular blocking drugs. Data from intradermal testing suggested that rocuronium is intermediate in its propensity to cause allergy in known relaxant reactors compared with low-risk agents (e.g. pancuronium, vecuronium) and higher-risk agents (e.g. alcuronium, succinylcholine).

[Contribution of flow cytometry to allergologic diagnosis]. / Apport de la cytométrie en flux dans le diagnostic allergologique.

The technique of Flow Cytometry for activation of basophils (TAB), expressed as the marker CD63, is at present one of the pathways of research applied to drug allergy. In this work are reported the results of TAB of Pneumoallergens and Hymenoptera venoms. TAB can define better than total IgE the atopy of the subject: in effect the fluorescence of the basophils is emphasized in comparison with non-atopic subjects. This hypothesis has been confirmed by a study of three groups of subjects. With regard to drug allergy, it is important to study patients in whom the observations have been documented very objectively by clinical history and positive skin tests to the drug, compared with a negative reference to the same drug. So, TAB has been shown to be very useful in diagnosis of allergy to certain drugs, such as the Myorelaxants.

[Apropos of drug allergy]. / A propos de l'allergie médicamenteuse.

Immuno-biological diagnosis of allergies lo medicines can be carried out using a Flow Cytometer and by activating cells such as basophils and lymphocytes with membrane markers. A description is given of two cases of patients allergic to a myorelaxant: Rocuronium, who showed a correlation between the clinical history, skin tests and a positive basophil activation test, when compared to six negative controls.

Cross-reactivity of rocuronium with other neuromuscular blocking agents.

The cross-reactivity of rocuronium with other neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) was studied in 31 patients known to be allergic to a muscle relaxant. Tests for diagnosing cross-reactivity were skin tests (prick tests and intradermal tests: IDTs), detection by RAST assay of IgEs against the quaternary ammonium group (QAS-RIA: quaternary ammonium sepharose radio-immuno-assay), QAS-RIA inhibition test to detect IgE specificity, and leucocyte histamine release test (LHRT). Skin tests were performed with rocuronium, suxamethonium, gallamine, vecuronium, pancuronium, atracurium. The threshold for cross-reactivity was 10(-1) with all the NMBAs except for atracurium (10(-2)). The inhibition test and LHRT were performed with rocuronium and the NMBA responsible for the shock. Ten volunteers made up the control group for prick tests, QAS-RIA, LHRT. Cross-reactivity was found in 30 patients out of 31. Rocuronium did not cross-react in 10 patients out of 31. They had negative cutaneous tests and negative LHRTs. In one of the five patients allergic to all the NMBAs available, rocuronium was the only one which did not cross-react. In those 10 patients, rocuronium may be safely used for subsequent anaesthesia. In terms of allergy, rocuronium appeared to be very close to the other steroidal NMBAs.