Association Between Severity of Anaphylaxis and Co-occurrence of Respiratory Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Asthma is very prevalent in all grades of severity of anaphylaxis. Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) have been associated with the severity of anaphylaxis. Objective: We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the influence of respiratory diseases on the severity of anaphylaxis. METHODS: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Web of Science for observational studies. The target studies were those that compared the severity of anaphylaxis between patients who had or did not have respiratory diseases. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies assessed the severity of anaphylaxis in respiratory disease. Respiratory disease increased the severity of anaphylaxis (OR, 1.87; 95%CI, 1.30-2.70), as did asthma (OR, 1.89; 95%CI, 1.26-2.83). For the meta-analysis of all studies (adjusted and nonadjusted), COPD increased the severity of anaphylaxis (OR, 2.47; 95%CI, 1.46-4.18). In the case of asthma studies, only 1 study assessed the influence of severity of asthma on severity of anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence showing that respiratory disease increases the severity of anaphylaxis is low to moderate, although studies do not usually assess the importance of severity of asthma.

Association Between Severity of Anaphylaxis and Co-occurrence of Respiratory Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Observational Studies

Background: Asthma is very prevalent in all grades of severity of anaphylaxis. Asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD)have been associated with the severity of anaphylaxis.Objective: We carried out a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the influence of respiratory diseases on the severity of anaphylaxis.Methods: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Web of Science for observational studies. The target studies were those thatcompared the severity of anaphylaxis between patients who had or did not have respiratory diseases.Results: A total of 13 studies assessed the severity of anaphylaxis in respiratory disease. Respiratory disease increased the severity ofanaphylaxis (OR, 1.87; 95%CI, 1.30-2.70), as did asthma (OR, 1.89; 95%CI, 1.26-2.83). For the meta-analysis of all studies (adjustedand nonadjusted), COPD increased the severity of anaphylaxis (OR, 2.47; 95%CI, 1.46-4.18). In the case of asthma studies, only 1 studyassessed the influence of severity of asthma on severity of anaphylaxis.Conclusions: Evidence showing that respiratory disease increases the severity of anaphylaxis is low to moderate, although studies do notusually assess the importance of severity of asthma.(AU)

Antecedentes: El asma es muy frecuente en todos los grados de gravedad de la anafilaxia y así mismo el asma y la enfermedad pulmonarobstructiva crónica (EPOC) se han asociado con las anafilaxias graves.Objetivo: Realizamos una revisión sistemática y un meta-análisis para evaluar la influencia de las enfermedades respiratorias en lagravedad de la anafilaxia.Métodos: Se realizaron búsquedas en PubMed / MEDLINE, EMBASE y Web of Science de estudios observacionales, en donde se compararonla gravedad de la anafilaxia entre pacientes que tenían o no enfermedades respiratorias.Resultados: Un total de 13 estudios evaluaron la influencia de las enfermedades respiratorias en la gravedad de la anafilaxia. La enfermedadrespiratoria aumentó la gravedad de la anafilaxia (OR, 1,87; IC 95%, 1,30-2,70). En general, el asma también aumentó la gravedad dela anafilaxia (OR, 1,89; IC del 95%, 1,26-2,83). En el meta-análisis de todos los estudios con EPOC (ajustado y no ajustado), la mismaaumentó la gravedad de la anafilaxia (OR, 2,47; IC del 95%, 1,46-4,18). En los estudios con asma, solo uno evaluó la influencia de lagravedad del asma en la gravedad de la anafilaxia.Conclusiones: La evidencia que muestra que la enfermedad respiratoria aumenta la gravedad de la anafilaxia es baja a moderada, aunquelos estudios no suelen evaluar la importancia de la gravedad del asma.(AU)

Basic Skin Care and Topical Therapies for Atopic Dermatitis: Essential Approaches and Beyond.

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a recurrent and chronic skin disease characterized by dysfunction of the epithelial barrier, skin inflammation, and immune dysregulation, with changes in the skin microbiota and colonization by Staphylococcus aureus being common. For this reason, the therapeutic approach to AD is complex and should be directed at restoring skin barrier function, reducing dehydration, maintaining acidic pH, and avoiding superinfection and exposure to possible allergens. There is no curative treatment for AD. However, a series of measures are recommended to alleviate the disease and enable patients to improve their quality of life. These include adequate skin hydration and restoration of the skin barrier with the use of emollients, antibacterial measures, specific approaches to reduce pruritus and scratching, wet wrap applications, avoidance of typical AD triggers, and topical anti-inflammatory drugs. Anti-inflammatory treatment is generally recommended during acute flares or, more recently, for preventive management. Nevertheless, the selection of the pharmacologic agent, as well as its potency, duration, and frequency of application must be in accordance with the severity of the disease and the distribution and type of the lesion. The objectives of this review are to emphasize the importance of basic skin care and to describe current and novel topical therapies for AD.

Basic skin care and topical therapies for atopic dermatitis: essential approaches and beyond

Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a recurrent and chronic skin disease characterized by dysfunction of the epithelial barrier, skin inflammation, and immune dysregulation, with changes in the skin microbiota and colonization by Staphylococcus aureus being common. For this reason, the therapeutic approach to AD is complex and should be directed at restoring skin barrier function, reducing dehydration, maintaining acidic pH, and avoiding superinfection and exposure to possible allergens. There is no curative treatment for AD. However, a series of measures are recommended to alleviate the disease and enable patients to improve their quality of life. These include adequate skin hydration and restoration of the skin barrier with the use of emollients, antibacterial measures, specific approaches to reduce pruritus and scratching, wet wrap applications, avoidance of typical AD triggers, and topical anti-inflammatory drugs. Anti-inflammatory treatment is generally recommended during acute flares or, more recently, for preventive management. Nevertheless, the selection of the pharmacologic agent, as well as its potency, duration, and frequency of application must be in accordance with the severity of the disease and the distribution and type of the lesion. The objectives of this review are to emphasize the importance of basic skin care and to describe current and novel topical therapies for AD

La dermatitis atópica (DA) es una enfermedad cutánea crónica y recurrente que se caracteriza por la existencia de una disfunción de la barrera epitelial, un proceso inflamatorio cutáneo, una alteración del sistema inmune y posibles cambios en la microbiota cutánea, siendo frecuente una posible colonización por Estafilococo aureus. Por ello, el abordaje terapéutico de la DA es complejo y debe de estar enfocado principalmente hacia la restauración de la barrera cutánea, la reducción de la deshidratación, el mantenimiento del PH ácido y la evitación de posibles sobreinfecciones y exposiciones a diferentes fuentes alergénicas. Actualmente no existe tratamientos curativos para la DA. Sin embargo, con el fin de aliviar la enfermedad y que mejore la calidad de vida de los pacientes, se recomiendan una serie de medidas que incluyen una adecuada hidratación y restauración de la barrera cutánea gracias a la aplicación de emolientes, medidas antibacterianas, reducción del picor y del rascado mediante determinados abordajes específicos, la aplicación de vendajes húmedos, la evitación de los desencadenantes de la DA y una terapia tópica antiinflamatoria adecuada. Los tratamientos anti-inflamatorios se recomiendan habitualmente durante las reagudizaciones y, más recientemente, como tratamiento preventivo. Sin embargo, dependiendo de la gravedad de la enfermedad, la distribución o el tipo de lesión, se seleccionará el agente farmacológico, su potencia, la duración y frecuencia necesaria de aplicación. El objetivo principal de esta revisión es resaltar la importancia del cuidado básico de la piel, además de describir los tratamientos tópicos, tanto actuales como emergentes, que existen para el abordaje de la dermatitis atópica

Clinical Profile of Patients With Severe Anaphylaxis Hospitalized in the Spanish Hospital System: 1997-2011.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Studies assessing the severity of anaphylaxis lack a comprehensive approach to collecting data on comorbidities that may worsen prognosis. Objective: Using the Elixhauser score (a systematic index associated with longer stay, hospital charges, and mortality), we determined which comorbidities were associated with more severe anaphylaxis. METHODS: We based our study on the Spanish Ministry of Health database of hospital discharges in Spain between 1997 and 2011. We constructed logistic regression models in which the dependent variables were outcomes related to greater severity (death, cardiac arrest, need for invasive mechanical ventilation or vasopressor drugs, admission to the intensive care unit, and length of stay) and the independent variables were the 30 comorbidities that comprise the Elixhauser score, age, sex, and main causes of anaphylaxis. RESULTS: We found that a higher risk of severe anaphylaxis was associated (3 or more logistic regressions) with age >50 years or having experienced cardiac arrhythmia, coagulation disorder, associated fluid-electrolyte imbalance, chronic pulmonary disease, or Echinococcus anaphylaxis. Likewise, in the adjusted analysis, a higher Elixhauser score was associated with most of the outcomes analyzed for severity of anaphylaxis. CONCLUSIONS: Cardiovascular and respiratory diseases increase the severity of anaphylaxis, and the resulting poor health status (represented as a higher Elixhauser score) is associated with more severe anaphylaxis.

Clinical profile of patients with severe anaphylaxis hospitalized in the Spanish Hospital System: 1997-2011

Background: Studies assessing the severity of anaphylaxis lack a comprehensive approach to collecting data on comorbidities that may worsen prognosis. Objective: Using the Elixhauser score (a systematic index associated with longer stay, hospital charges, and mortality), we determined which comorbidities were associated with more severe anaphylaxis. Methods: We based our study on the Spanish Ministry of Health database of hospital discharges in Spain between 1997 and 2011. We constructed logistic regression models in which the dependent variables were outcomes related to greater severity (death, cardiac arrest, need for invasive mechanical ventilation or vasopressor drugs, admission to the intensive care unit, and length of stay) and the independent variables were the 30 comorbidities that comprise the Elixhauser score, age, sex, and main causes of anaphylaxis. Results: We found that a higher risk of severe anaphylaxis was associated (3 or more logistic regressions) with age >50 years or having experienced cardiac arrhythmia, coagulation disorder, associated fluid-electrolyte imbalance, chronic pulmonary disease, or Echinococcus anaphylaxis. Likewise, in the adjusted analysis, a higher Elixhauser score was associated with most of the outcomes analyzed for severity of anaphylaxis. Conclusions: Cardiovascular and respiratory diseases increase the severity of anaphylaxis, and the resulting poor health status (represented as a higher Elixhauser score) is associated with more severe anaphylaxis (AU)

Antecedentes: Los estudios que recogen datos sobre comorbilidades que empeoran la gravedad de la anafilaxia, carecen de un acercamiento exhaustivo. Objetivo: Usando la puntuación de Elixhauser (un sistema de puntuación asociado con mayor estancia hospitalaria, mayor gasto hospitalario y muerte), establecimos que comorbilidades fueron asociadas con anafilaxia grave. Métodos: Usamos para el estudio la base de datos de altas hospitalarias del Ministerio Español de Sanidad, entre 1997 a 2011. Se obtuvo varios modelos de regresión logística, en las cuales las variables dependientes fueron desenlaces relacionados con eventos asociados habitualmente a una gran gravedad de los episodios (muerte, parada cardio-respiratoria, necesidad de uso de ventilación mecánica invasiva o medicamentos vaso-presores, ingreso en la Unidad de Cuidados Intensivos y duración de la estancia) y las variables independientes fueron las 30 comorbilidades que comprenden la puntuación Elixhauser, junto con edad, sexo y las grandes causas de anafilaxia. Resultados: Encontramos que un mayor riesgo para anafilaxia grave estuvo asociado (3 o más regresiones logísticas con significación estadística) con una edad de más de 50 años, o haber experimentado arritmias cardiacas, alteraciones de la coagulación, disbalance hidro-electrolítico, enfermedad pulmonar crónica o anafilaxia por Echinococcus. Así mismo, en un análisis ajustado, una puntuación mayor del sistema Elixhauser se asoció con la mayoría de las variables de desenlace usadas para analizar la gravedad de la anafilaxia. Conclusiones: Enfermedades cardio-vasculares y respiratorias incrementan la gravedad de la anafilaxia y un mal estado de salud (representado por mayores puntuaciones del Sistema de puntuación de Elixhauser) se asocian con mayor gravedad de la anafilaxia (AU)

Epidemiology of Anaphylaxis: Contributions From the Last 10 Years.

Knowledge of the epidemiology of anaphylaxis has improved during the last 10 years thanks to the increased number of publications with improved methodological robustness. Consequently, we better understand the distribution and frequency of anaphylaxis and the characteristics of fatal anaphylaxis. We now know that anaphylaxis is more frequent than previously thought (up to 50-103 cases per 100 000 person-years), although the distribution differs with the age group (up to 3 times in patients aged 0-4 years), cause (food-induced anaphylaxis is more frequent in young people, drug-induced and Hymenoptera anaphylaxis in older patients), and geographical area (more prevalent in areas with less sunlight). A controversial and unresolved issue is whether this high incidence of anaphylaxis is a real increase or merely the result of better identification of anaphylaxis by the attending physician. Recurrence of anaphylaxis has been recorded in one-third of cases, although it is the least studied area of the epidemiology of anaphylaxis. Fatal anaphylaxis, on the other hand, has been widely studied. We know that death from anaphylaxis is a rare and extraordinary event (0.12 to 1.06 deaths per million person-years) and more likely in older individuals in the case of drug and Hymenoptera anaphylaxis. Studies conducted during the last 10 years are highly powered since they include large numbers of patients (national records of hospitalized patients) over long time periods (10-20 years) or have been conducted with representative samples of the general population.

Increased incidence of admissions for anaphylaxis in Spain 1998-2011.

We report on trends in anaphylaxis admissions in the Spanish hospital system during the period 1998-2011. Data on admissions for anaphylaxis were obtained from the Spanish Information System for Hospital Data for the period 1998-2011. Patients were selected using the codes for anaphylaxis in the International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM). Poisson regression models were used to estimate incidence rate ratios. We recorded a 1.89-fold increase in admissions for anaphylaxis in Spanish hospitals during the study period, particularly in patients aged 0-14 years (1.65- to 3.22-fold until 2009 and 4.09- to 12.59-fold until 2011) and in food anaphylaxis in all age groups (2.78-fold until 2009 and 8.74-fold until 2011). The incidence of anaphylaxis is perceived as having increased in recent years, especially anaphylaxis caused by food and anaphylaxis affecting the pediatric population.

Epidemiology of anaphylaxis.

Knowledge about the epidemiology of anaphylaxis is based on data from various sources: clinical practice, large secondary clinical and administrative databases of primary care or hospitalized patients, and recent surveys with representative samples of the general population. As several similar results are often reported in several publications and populations, such findings are highly like to be robust. One such finding is that the incidence and prevalence of anaphylaxis are higher than previously thought. Publications from the last 5 years reveal an incidence of between 50 and 112 episodes per 100 000 person-years; estimated prevalence is 0.3-5.1% depending on the rigour of the definitions used. Figures are higher in children, especially those aged 0-4 years. Publications from various geographical areas based on clinical and administrative data on hospitalized patients suggest that the frequency of admissions due to anaphylaxis has increased (5-7-fold in the last 10-15 years). Other publications point to a geographic gradient in the incidence of anaphylaxis, with higher frequencies recorded in areas with few hours of sunlight. However, these trends could be the result of factors other than a real change in the incidence of anaphylaxis, such as changes in disease coding and in the care provided. Based on data from the records of voluntary declarations of death by physicians and from large national databases, death from anaphylaxis remains very infrequent and stands at 0.35-1.06 deaths per million people per year, with no increases observed in the last 10-15 years. Although anaphylaxis can be fatal, recurrence of anaphylaxis--especially that associated with atopic diseases and hymenoptera stings--affects 26.5-54% of patients.

Self-Management of Anaphylaxis Is Not Optimal.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to ascertain the degree of adherence to recommendations made to patients with anaphylaxis, most of whom were attended in our allergy outpatient clinic. METHODS: A questionnaire was sent to 1512 patients who had experienced anaphylaxis and completed by 887. The chosen definition of anaphylaxis was that of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network Symposium. We evaluated the prescription, purchase, and use of epinephrine auto-injectors and oral drugs, as well as the avoidance of allergens involved in previous anaphylaxis episodes. RESULTS: Most patients (94.53%) reported that they had received advice on avoidance of responsible allergens after their allergy workup. Epinephrine auto-injectors and oral drugs were prescribed according to the subtype of anaphylaxis. Only 30.74% of patients used the epinephrine auto-injector; 54.26% took oral medication. Most patients (88.3%) avoided the allergen. CONCLUSIONS: Despite general agreement that anaphylaxis occurring in the community should be treated with epinephrine auto-injectors, use of these devices to treat recurrences was low in our patients. Oral medication intake was more common than the epinephrine auto-injector in all subtypes. In order to increase adherence to epinephrine auto-injectors, it is necessary to think beyond the measures recommended during regular visits to allergy outpatient clinics.

Epidemiology of anaphylaxis: contributions from the last 10 years

En los últimos 10 años se ha incrementado notablemente el conocimiento del que disponemos sobre la epidemiología de la anafilaxia, gracias al aumento de las publicaciones realizadas y a su robustez metodológica, a nuevos progresos en el conocimiento de la frecuencia y a una mejor compresión en la distribución de la enfermedad y de las características de la muerte por anafilaxia. Con estos estudios, sabemos que la anafilaxia es más frecuente de lo pensado (hasta 50-103 casos por 100.000 personas-año), pero con distinta distribución entre los diferentes grupos de edad (hasta tres veces más en el grupo de 0-4 años), entre los diferentes causas de la anafilaxia (anafilaxia inducida por alimentos más frecuentes en las personas jóvenes, las anafilaxias inducidas por medicamentos, en himenópteros en las edades maduras de la vida) y entre los diferentes territorios geográficos (con más prevalencia en las zonas con menor radiación solar). Un tema controvertido y aún no resuelto es si esta gran frecuencia de la anafilaxia se debe a un aumento real de la misma o a una mejor identificación de la anafilaxia entre los médicos que asisten a estos pacientes. as recurrencias de anafilaxia aparecen en muchos estudios en un tercio de los casos, aunque es el tema de la epidemiología de la anafilaxia menos estudiado. Sin embargo, la muerte por anafilaxia se ha estudiado ampliamente. Sabemos que la muerte por anafilaxia es un evento muy raro y extraordinario (0,12 a 1,06 muertes por cada millón de personas-año) y es más probable en las edades más avanzadas de la vida en las anafilaxias por medicamentos e himenópteros. Los estudios llevados a cabo en los últimos 10 años destacan por su gran potencia, dado que han incluido gran número de pacientes (registros de pacientes hospitalizados que abarcaban todo un país), durante largos períodos de tiempo (10 a 20 años) o han sido realizados con muestras representativas de la población general (AU)

Knowledge of the epidemiology of anaphylaxis has improved during the last 10 years thanks to the increased number of publications with improved methodological robustness. Consequently, we better understand the distribution and frequency of anaphylaxis and the characteristics of fatal anaphylaxis. We now know that anaphylaxis is more frequent than previously thought (up to 50-103 cases per 100 000 person-years), although the distribution differs with the age group (up to 3 times in patients aged 0-4 years), cause (food-induced anaphylaxis is more frequent in young people, drug-induced and Hymenoptera anaphylaxis in older patients), and geographical area (more prevalent in areas with less sunlight). A controversial and unresolved issue is whether this high incidence of anaphylaxis is a real increase or merely the result of better identification of anaphylaxis by the attending physician. Recurrence of anaphylaxis has been recorded in one-third of cases, although it is the least studied area of the epidemiology of anaphylaxis. Fatal anaphylaxis, on the other hand, has been widely studied. We know that death from anaphylaxis is a rare and extraordinary event (0.12 to 1.06 deaths per million person-years) and more likely in older individuals in the case of drug and Hymenoptera anaphylaxis. Studies conducted during the last 10 years are highly powered since they include large numbers of patients (national records of hospitalized patients) over long time periods (10-20 years) or have been conducted with representative samples of the general population (AU)

Self-management of anaphylaxis is not optimal

Background: Our objective was to ascertain the degree of adherence to recommendations made to patients with anaphylaxis, most of whom were attended in our allergy outpatient clinic. Methods: A questionnaire was sent to 1512 patients who had experienced anaphylaxis and completed by 887. The chosen definition of anaphylaxis was that of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network Symposium. We evaluated the prescription, purchase, and use of epinephrine auto-injectors and oral drugs, as well as the avoidance of allergens involved in previous anaphylaxis episodes. Results: Most patients (94.53%) reported that they had received advice on avoidance of responsible allergens after their allergy workup. Epinephrine auto-injectors and oral drugs were prescribed according to the subtype of anaphylaxis. Only 30.74% of patients used the epinephrine auto-injector; 54.26% took oral medication. Most patients (88.3%) avoided the allergen. Conclusions: Despite general agreement that anaphylaxis occurring in the community should be treated with epinephrine auto-injectors, use of these devices to treat recurrences was low in our patients. Oral medication intake was more common than the epinephrine auto-injector in all subtypes. In order to increase adherence to epinephrine auto-injectors, it is necessary to think beyond the measures recommended during regular visits to allergy outpatient clinics (AU)

Antecedentes: Guías clínicas y documentos de posicionamiento recomiendan planes de acción urgentes personalizados para los pacientes que han tenido anafilaxia. El cumplimiento de estos planes es generalmente bajo. Objetivo: Nuestro objetivo fue determinar el grado de adherencia a diferentes recomendaciones hechas a los pacientes con anafilaxia, que en la mayoría de los cuales fueron atendidos en la consulta externa de Alergia de nuestro hospital. Métodos: Se envió un cuestionario a 1.512 pacientes que habían sufrido un episodio previo de anafilaxia y este fue completado por 887. La definición elegida de anafilaxia fue la del Instituto Nacional de Alergias y Enfermedades Infecciosas y el Simposio de la Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID-FAAN). Se evaluó la prescripción, la compra y el uso de auto-inyectores de adrenalina y medicamentos orales, así como la evitación de alérgenos implicados en los episodios de anafilaxia anteriores. Resultados: La mayoría de los pacientes (94,53%) informaron que habían sido aconsejados sobre la evitación de alérgenos responsables después de su evaluación alergológica. Los auto-inyectores de adrenalina y los medicamentos orales se prescribieron de forma diferente según el subtipo de anafilaxia. Sólo el 30.74% de los pacientes utilizaron el auto inyector de adrenalina y el 54,26% tomo la medicación oral. La mayoría de los pacientes (88,3%) evitaron el alérgeno. Conclusiones: A pesar del acuerdo general que los episodios de anafilaxia que ocurren en la comunidad deben ser tratados con autoinyectores de adrenalina, el uso de estos dispositivos para el tratamiento de las recurrencias fue baja en nuestros pacientes. La ingesta oral de medicamentos es más común que el auto inyector de adrenalina en todos los subtipos. Con el fin de aumentar la adherencia a autoinyectores de adrenalina, es necesario investigar más allá de las medidas recomendadas durante las visitas regulares a las consultas de Alergia (AU)

Recurrence of Anaphylaxis in a Spanish Series

Background: Anaphylaxis is a potentially fatal condition, and many patients experience recurrence. Objective: We report the incidence of first recurrence of anaphylaxis in our series and examine the risk factors associated with recurrence. Methods: A validated questionnaire was sent to 1512 patients and completed by 887. The chosen definition of anaphylaxis was that of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases/Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network Symposium. We evaluated the incidence of first recurrence of anaphylaxis overall and by subtype (eg, drugs and foods) and attempted to determine associated risk factors. Results: The total incidence rate of the first recurrence of anaphylaxis (same subtype) was 3.2 episodes per 100 person-years (95%CI, 2.83-3.63). Incidence was lower in drug anaphylaxis (2.0 episodes per 100 person-years) than in latex and food anaphylaxis (8.6 and 5.6 episodes per 100 person-years, respectively). Cox and ordinal logistic regression models revealed that a first recurrence was less likely with drug anaphylaxis than with food anaphylaxis. The risk of experiencing 1 or more recurrences was higher for foods, exercise, and idiopathic causes than for the other subtypes. Conclusions: The incidence rate for a first recurrence of the same subtype of anaphylaxis was 2 to 6 times lower than that published by other authors. Recurrence of anaphylaxis is more common in subtypes with an increased prevalence of atopy (food, idiopathic, latex) than in other subtypes (drugs, Anisakis). Consequently, particular attention should be paid to prevention and care in this population (AU)

Antecedentes: Aunque la anafilaxia es una enfermedad potencialmente fatal, muchos pacientes sufren recurrencias de la misma. Objetivo: Nuestro objetivo fue conocer la incidencia de la primera recurrencia de la anafilaxia en nuestra serie y examinar los factores de riesgo asociados a la misma. Métodos: Un cuestionario validado fue enviado a 1512 pacientes y completado por 887. La definición de anafilaxia elegida fue la del Simposio NIAID-FAAN (National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases/Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network). Se evaluó la incidencia de la primera recurrencia de la anafilaxia en general y por subtipo (por ejemplo, medicamentos y alimentos) y se trató de determinar factores de riesgo asociados a la recurrencia. Resultados: La tasa de incidencia total de la primera recurrencia de la anafilaxia (el mismo subtipo) fue de 3,2 episodios por 100 personas año (95% CI, 2,83 a 3,63). La incidencia fue menor en la anafilaxia por medicamentos (2,0 episodios por 100 personas-año) que en la anafilaxia por látex y alimentos (8,6 y 5,6 episodios por 100 personas-año respectivamente). Los modelos de regresión de Cox y logística ordinal revelaron que la primera recurrencia fue menos probable con anafilaxia por medicamentos que con la anafilaxia alimentaria. El riesgo de sufrir una o más recurrencias fue mayor para los alimentos, el ejercicio, y anafilaxia idiopática que para los otros subtipos. Conclusiones: La tasa de incidencia de una primera recurrencia del mismo subtipo de anafilaxia fue 2-6 veces inferior a la publicada por otros autores. La recurrencia de la anafilaxia es más común en los subtipos con una mayor prevalencia de atopia (alimentos, idiopática, látex) que en los otros subtipos (medicamentos, Anisakis). Por lo tanto, se debería prestar especial atención a la prevención y atención de estas poblaciones (AU)

Incidence of anaphylaxis in the city of Alcorcon (Spain): a population-based study.

BACKGROUND: Relatively few studies have examined the incidence of anaphylaxis in the general population. OBJECTIVE: To report the incidence of anaphylaxis among the general population of the city of Alcorcon, Spain, using various public health care databases. METHODS: Episodes of anaphylaxis were recovered using validated alphanumeric strings in different fields of electronic clinical records used in the different public health settings in the city of Alcorcon (primary care, Emergency Department, hospitalized patients and Allergy Outpatient Clinic). Patients with anaphylaxis were tracked across the different clinical settings in Alcorcon. RESULTS: The incidence of anaphylaxis in Alcorcon was 103.37 episodes per 100 000 person-years (total standardized incidence rate of 112.2). There was a peak of 313.58 episodes in the 0-4 years age group and a different distribution of incidence rates (although non-significant) among different age groups between male patients and female patients. In most age groups, incidence tended to be higher for female patients aged over 10 years. Patients were attended at two or more levels in 76.78% of episodes, and a new evaluation was often made at a primary care centre (71.43%), Allergy Outpatient Clinic (75.6%), or both after the episode (58.93%). CONCLUSION AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This study revealed a higher rate of anaphylaxis than that in previous studies, although this incidence rate is probably lower than the real incidence rate. Studies exploring potential methodological, genetic and environmental factors accounting for these higher rates of anaphylaxis are required.

Incidence of anaphylaxis and subtypes of anaphylaxis in a general hospital emergency department.

BACKGROUND: The absence of large-scale international studies means that data on anaphylaxis in emergency departments in different geographic areas are still necessary. OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence of anaphylaxis and subtypes of anaphylaxis and their distribution by age group in the emergency department of Hospital Universitario Fundación Alcorcon, Alcorcon (Madrid), Spain. METHODS: Our study was performed between 2004 and 2005. We used the definition of anaphylaxis established by the NIAID-FAAN Symposium. Patient information was collected from the electronic clinical records of the emergency department using alphanumeric strings to identify acute allergic illnesses. This strategy recovered 91.7% of all anaphylaxis episodes in a pilot study. RESULTS: We observed a crude cumulative incidence of 0.9 episodes of anaphylaxis per 1000 emergency episodes (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8-1.1), and 0.8 episodes per 1000 people (95% CI, 0.7-0.9). Standardized cumulative incidence of anaphylaxis according to the Standardized European Population was 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9-1.2). On analyzing the 213 cases of anaphylaxis, we discovered that the main cause was food (28.6%), followed by drugs (28.2%), unknown causes (27.2%), Anisakis (10.8%), Hymenoptera venom (3.3%), exercise (2.4%), and latex (0.9%). Food-induced anaphylaxis was less frequent in all groups older than the 0-4 age group in both reference populations (people who attend the emergency department and the general population). CONCLUSIONS: The cumulative incidence of anaphylaxis in our emergency department is low. Anaphylaxis by foods is more frequent in the 0-4 year group than in the other age groups. Drugs and food are the most frequent causes of anaphylaxis in our emergency department.

Thrombocytopenia and anaphylaxis secondary to heparin in a hemodialysis patient.

AIMS: We describe a rare case of anaphylaxis and thrombocytopenia whose cause was heparin used during hemodialysis sessions. CASE REPORT: A 77-year-old woman suffered five consecutive episodes of vomiting, tachypnea, wheezing or rales, immediately after initiating hemodialysis. In the first of these episodes, arterial pressure was undetectable. In all of the episodes there was evidence of the presence of hypoxia (always below 60 mmHg) and thrombocytopenia (always below l00,000/microl,, with partial platelets recovery among episodes. The episodes started immediately after hemodialysis sessions and heparin infusion; either sodium heparin or enoxaparin was used. Utilization of different filters was not able to stop the episodes. These were stopped when a switch from heparin to hirudin was tested. Tryptase levels, as a marker of mast cells activation and anaphylaxis, were not increased in two of the episodes which were assessed. IgG antibodies against heparin-PF4 complex was detected at high levels. DISCUSSION: A diagnosis of concomitant anaphylaxis and thrombocytopenia caused by sodium heparin and a low-molecular weight heparin (enoxaparin) were assumed.