RESUMEN
SUMMARY: The authors present 2 case reports of selective cefazolin hypersensitivity: a 49 year-old woman with a history of two perioperative reactions (urticaria and severe anaphylaxis) after the use of rocuronium, propophol and cefazolin; a 36 year-old pregnant woman who developed facial erythema, lips angioedema and hypotension immediately after administration of ropivacain, sufentanil, cefazolin, oxytocin and ephedrine. In both cases, intradermal skin tests were positive for cefazolin. A basophil activation test was performed for cefazolin, which was positive in one patient. Oral challenge tests with penicillin, amoxicillin and other cephalosporins were negative. This selective hypersensitivity to cefazolin may be associated with a R1-side chain different from other beta-lactams.
Asunto(s)
Anafilaxia/inducido químicamente , Antibacterianos/efectos adversos , Prueba de Desgranulación de los Basófilos , Basófilos/efectos de los fármacos , Cefazolina/efectos adversos , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/etiología , Urticaria/inducido químicamente , Adulto , Anafilaxia/diagnóstico , Anafilaxia/inmunología , Antibacterianos/inmunología , Basófilos/inmunología , Cefazolina/inmunología , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/diagnóstico , Hipersensibilidad a las Drogas/inmunología , Femenino , Humanos , Pruebas Intradérmicas , Persona de Mediana Edad , Valor Predictivo de las Pruebas , Embarazo , Urticaria/diagnóstico , Urticaria/inmunologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Bronchiectasis are common in Common Variable Immunodeficiency. These patients are prone to infection, leading to progressive lung destruction and accelerated FEV1 decline. CLINICAL CASE: 40 year-old man, with recurrent respiratory infections, autoimmunity and diarrhea since age 7. At 17 CVID was diagnosed and IVIgG was started. During the following years, respiratory symptoms progressively worsened and bronchiectasis was found on thoracic computed tomography. Bronchoscopy revealed Pseudomonas aeruginosa in bronchoalveolar lavage and bronchial secretions cultures. Eradication therapy led to clinical improvement. DISCUSSION: This case report stresses the importance of regular microbiological screening and appropriate antibiotherapy. Early/aggressive treatment may significantly impact on patients' evolution.
Asunto(s)
Bronquiectasia/microbiología , Inmunodeficiencia Variable Común/complicaciones , Infecciones por Pseudomonas/microbiología , Pseudomonas aeruginosa/aislamiento & purificación , Adulto , Antibacterianos/uso terapéutico , Bronquiectasia/diagnóstico , Bronquiectasia/tratamiento farmacológico , Líquido del Lavado Bronquioalveolar/microbiología , Broncoscopía , Inmunodeficiencia Variable Común/diagnóstico , Inmunodeficiencia Variable Común/tratamiento farmacológico , Humanos , Inmunoglobulinas Intravenosas/uso terapéutico , Masculino , Infecciones por Pseudomonas/diagnóstico , Infecciones por Pseudomonas/tratamiento farmacológico , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos X , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Severe asthma is a challenging disease, and omalizumab has been an important tool to help clinicians address more efficiently this problem. Besides reduction of free and total serum IgE levels, there are a number of other immunologic effects of omalizumab that may be of relevance in its therapeutic action. We report two mite-allergic severe asthmatic patients successfully treated with omalizumab for one year. Clinically, patients improved gradually, with no further need for systemic steroids or emergency department visits during that treatment period, and with Asthma Control Test (ACT) scores showing controlled disease, although pulmonary function didn't show any significant improvement. Immunologically, we observed marked down-regulation of surface IgE and FcεRI on basophils, plasmacytoid and myeloid dendritic cells, as well as a reduction of basophil activation after specific allergen stimulation. These effects were clearly evident immediately after one month but were enhanced at 3, 6 and 12 months of omalizumab treatment, suggesting an advantage to continuing this therapy, and raising the hypothesis of some markers being useful to assess immunological responses to omalizumab, which could assist in the clinician's decision to stop or to restart this treatment.