Idiopathic anaphylaxis: Diagnosis and management

2021 ◽  
Vol 42 (6) ◽  
pp. 481-488 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alyssa G. Burrows ◽  
Anne K. Ellis

Introduction: Idiopathic anaphylaxis (IA) is a diagnosis of exclusion and is based on the inability to identify a causal relationship between a trigger and an anaphylactic event, despite a detailed patient history and careful diagnostic assessment. The prevalence of IA among the subset of people who experienced anaphylaxis is challenging to estimate and varies widely, from 10 to 60%; most commonly noted is ∼20% in the adult anaphylactic population. Comorbid atopic conditions, such as food allergy, allergic rhinitis, and asthma, are present in up to 48% of patients with IA. Improved diagnostic technologies and an increased understanding of conditions that manifest with symptoms associated with anaphylaxis have improved the ability to determine a more accurate diagnosis for patients who may have been initially diagnosed with IA. Methods: Literature search was conducted on PubMed, Google Scholar and Embase. Results: Galactose-α-1,3-galactose (α-gal) allergy, mast cell disorders, and hereditary a-tryptasemia are a few differential diagnoses that should be considered in patients with IA. Unlike food allergy, when anaphylaxis occurs within minutes to 2 hours after allergen consumption, α-gal allergy is a 3‐6-hour delayed immunoglobulin E‐mediated anaphylactic reaction to a carbohydrate epitope found in red meat (e.g., beef, lamb, pork). The more recently described hereditary α-tryptasemia is an inherited autosomal dominant genetic trait caused by increased germline copies of tryptase human gene alpha-beta 1 (TPSAB1), which encodes α tryptase and is associated with elevated baseline serum tryptase. Acute management of IA consists of carrying an epinephrine autoinjector to be administered immediately at the first signs of anaphylaxis. Long-term management for IA with antihistamines and other agents aims to potentially reduce the frequency and severity of the anaphylactic reactions, although the evidence is limited. Biologics are potentially steroid-sparing for patients with IA; however, more research on IA therapies is needed. Conclusion: The lack of diagnostic criteria, finite treatment options, and intricacies of making a differential diagnosis make IA challenging for patients and clinicians to manage.

2021 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 173-176
Author(s):  
Elissa M Abrams ◽  
Kyla J Hildebrand ◽  
Edmond S Chan

Abstract The most common types of non-IgE-mediated food allergy are food protein-induced enterocolitis syndrome (FPIES) and food protein-induced allergic proctocolitis (FPIAP). FPIES presents with delayed refractory emesis, while FPIAP presents with hematochezia in otherwise healthy infants. Acute management of FPIES includes rehydration or ondansetron, or both. No acute management is required for FPIAP. Long-term management of both disorders includes avoidance of the trigger food. The prognosis for both conditions is a high rate of resolution within a few years’ time.


2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Debra de Silva ◽  
Sukhmeet S Panesar ◽  
Sundeep Thusu ◽  
Tamara Rader ◽  
Thomas Werfel ◽  
...  

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (5) ◽  
pp. 1630
Author(s):  
Pierfrancesco Visaggi ◽  
Lucia Mariani ◽  
Veronica Pardi ◽  
Emma Maria Rosi ◽  
Camilla Pugno ◽  
...  

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a unique form of non-immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergy, restricted to the esophagus, characterized by esophageal eosinophil-predominant inflammation and dysfunction. The diagnosis requires an esophago-gastroduodenoscopy with esophageal biopsies demonstrating active eosinophilic inflammation with 15 or more eosinophils/high-power field, following the exclusion of alternative causes of eosinophilia. Food allergens trigger the disease, withdairy/milk, wheat/gluten, egg, soy/legumes, and seafood the most common. Therapeutic strategies comprise dietary restrictions, proton pump inhibitors, topical corticosteroids, biologic agents, and esophageal dilation when strictures are present. However, avoidance of trigger foods remains the only option targeting the cause, and not the effect, of the disease. Because EoE relapses when treatment is withdrawn, dietary therapy offers a long-term, drug-free alternative to patients who wish to remain off drugs and still be in remission. There are currently multiple dietary management strategies to choose from, each having its specific efficacy, advantages, and disadvantages that both clinicians and patients should acknowledge. In addition, dietary regimens should be tailored around each individual patient to increase the chance of tolerability and long-term adherence. In general, liquid elemental diets devoid of antigens and elimination diets restricting causative foods are valuable options. Designing diets on the basis of food allergy skin tests results is not reliable and should be avoided. This review summarizes the most recent knowledge regarding the clinical use of dietary measures in EoE. We discussed endpoints, rationale, advantages and disadvantages, and tailoring of diets, as well as currently available dietary regimens for EoE.


2020 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 81-85
Author(s):  
Timothy G. Chow ◽  
Christopher Parrish ◽  
J. Andrew Bird

The goal of allergen-specific immunotherapy for treatment of immunoglobulin E (IgE) mediated food allergy is to safely and effectively modify the allergic response, providing protection against anaphylaxis via ongoing exposure to the triggering allergen. Targeted allergen exposure via application of allergen to the epidermis has emerged as a potentially promising approach to desensitization. Epicutaneous immunotherapy (EPIT) uses allergen embedded on an adhesive patch secured to the skin. This allows for long-lasting allergen exposure, with subsequent antigen uptake and trafficking by skin antigen‐presenting cells to regional lymph nodes, which produce immunomodulatory effects in a manner that is noninvasive and limits exposure of allergen to the systemic circulation when applied to intact skin. As such, EPIT is overall well tolerated; local application site reactions are common, but systemic adverse effects are infrequent compared with other forms of immunotherapy. For peanut allergy, EPIT may increase the dose-triggering threshold in some individuals with peanut-allergy, especially younger children, but induction of remission has not been closely studied, and reliable predictors of clinical response are lacking. With U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved treatment for peanut allergy now available, the precepts of shared decision-making will be crucial in discussions with patients and their families with regard to treatment options.


2011 ◽  
Vol 6 (2) ◽  
pp. 115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paul van Asch ◽  

In the second of two articles, the impact of mobility impairment in multiple sclerosis (MS) is examined from the patients’ perspective. Nearly half (45 %) of patients reported experiencing mobility difficulties within a month of diagnosis and nearly all patients (93 %) report difficulties within 10 years. Three quarters of the patients surveyed considered mobility impairment to be a significant problem and two-thirds believed it had contributed toward loss of earnings. Mobility difficulties were consistently reported across all age groups, but were a greater issue for men than women. Geographical differences were observed, particularly in the type of healthcare professional (HCP) with whom problems were discussed, the prevalence of mobility symptoms and the treatment options offered. These findings support previous studies on the impact of mobility difficulties on patients’ quality of life and highlight discrepancies between HCPs’ and patients’ perceptions, particularly in the severity of mobility impairment and treatment options. Patients consider loss of mobility to be limiting, challenging and frustrating, highlighting the need for long-term management of their mobility issues and new or improved therapeutic options.


2019 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
pp. 353-360
Author(s):  
Helen Teixeira ◽  
Myungkuk Kang ◽  
Kathryn Lees ◽  
Sharon Beesley ◽  
Albert Edwards ◽  
...  

Brachytherapy is a well-established treatment for localised prostate cancer. Urologists are often tasked with discussing all available treatment options with the newly diagnosed patient. Unlike radical prostatectomy and external beam radiotherapy, knowledge of brachytherapy may be limited. The aim of this article is to provide an up-to-date guide on patient selection, modern brachytherapy techniques and the management of side effects, such that the core urologist can be more confident in both discussing initial treatment options and the long-term management of brachytherapy patients. Level of Evidence: Level 5 - review article


Allergy ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 69 (2) ◽  
pp. 159-167 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. de Silva ◽  
M. Geromi ◽  
S. S. Panesar ◽  
A. Muraro ◽  
T. Werfel ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document