Prevalence of COVID-19 in children affected by allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma: results from the second “SIAIP rhinosinusitis and conjunctivitis committee” survey

Background The role of allergic sensitization seems to be protective against SARS CoV2 infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate, using online surveys, the impact of COVID-19 on Italian allergic children, comparing the prevalence of AR and asthma symptoms between the first and second pandemic wave. Methods Both surveys were emailed to Italian pediatricians in April 2020 (first survey) and in March 2021 (second survey). The first one was related to the impact of COVID-19 and the most frequently reported symptoms. The second one was superimposed on the previous one, taking into account some additional aspects in the management of disease. Results A total of 99 pediatricians participated in the first survey and 267 in the second one. The first survey showed that, asthma and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis prevalence was mostly between 0 and 20% throughout the country. The second survey showed a lower prevalence of both diseases nationwide in comparison to the first one. Comparing the two surveys, statistically significant differences were reported only in the distribution of asthma prevalence in Southern Italy while no differences were highlighted in the North and in the Center. Finally regarding allergic rhinoconjunctivitis prevalence, no differences were noticed nationwide. Conclusions Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma, if under control, did not represent risk factors for the susceptibility to SARS CoV2. Therefore, it is strongly recommended to continue therapies during COVID-19 outbreak, according to the international guidelines. However, being COVID-19 a new disease, actual knowledge will undergo continuous improvements over time.

Prevalence of COVID-19 in Children Affected by Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis and Asthma: Results From the Second “SIAIP Rhinosinusitis and Conjunctivitis Committee” Survey

BackgroundThe role of allergic sensitization seems to be protective against SARS CoV2 infection. The aim of this study was to evaluate, using online surveys, the impact of COVID-19 on Italian allergic children, comparing the prevalence of AR and asthma symptoms between the first and second pandemic wave.MethodsBoth surveys were emailed to Italian pediatricians in April 2020 (first survey) and in March 2021 (second survey). The first one was related to the impact of COVID-19 and the most frequently reported symptoms. The second one was superimposed on the previous one, taking into account some additional aspects in the management of disease.ResultsA total of 99 pediatricians participated in the first survey and 267 in the second one. The first survey showed that, asthma and allergic rhinoconjunctivitis prevalence was mostly between 0-20% throughout the country. The second survey showed a lower prevalence of both diseases nationwide in comparison to the first one. Comparing the two surveys, statistically significant differences were reported only in the distribution of asthma prevalence in Southern Italy while no differences were highlighted in the North and in the Center. Finally regarding allergic rhinoconjunctivitis prevalence, no differences were noticed nationwide.ConclusionsAllergic rhinoconjunctivitis and asthma, if under control, did not represent risk factors for the susceptibility to SARS CoV2. Therefore, it is strongly recommended to continue therapies during COVID-19 outbreak, according to the international guidelines. However, being COVID-19 a new disease, actual knowledge will undergo continuous improvements over time.

Face masks suitable for preventing COVID-19 and pollen allergy. A study in the exposure chamber

Summary Background Since the outbreak of the coronavirus pandemic, the population in Germany has been asked to wear face masks in public areas. The masks are accepted by the public. People with a pollen allergy have an interest in knowing whether masks can also provide protection against pollen and thus prevent symptoms even without medication. Method In order to evaluate the potential ‘antipollen effect’ of face masks, 14 adults with confirmed grass pollen-induced allergic rhinoconjunctivitis were exposed to grass pollen for a period of two hours following a standardised protocol. The test was conducted outside of the grass pollen season. The subjects wore either no mask, a medical mask or a FFP2 mask. Results Subjects wearing either mask were clearly able to avoid both nasal and conjunctival symptoms. There were no significant differences between the two masks in terms of effect. Mask wearing to prevent pollen exposure clearly supports overall well-being. Conclusion Wearing a mask during pollen season can be recommended as an effective nondrug option for people with a pollen allergy.

Descriptive Epidemiology in Allergic Rhinoconjunctivitis in the Last 5 Years in Northern Mexico

Purpose: To determine the frequency of allergic conjunctivitis in the period from 2015 to 2020 at the Regional Center of Allergy and Clinical Immunology of the University Hospital “Dr. José Eleuterio González” in Monterrey, Nuevo Leon, Mexico. Methods: Observational, retrospective and descriptive study. The database of all patients with diagnosis of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis seen in the outpatient clinics from January 2015 to May 2020 was reviewed. Results: The incidence from 2015 to 2020 of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis in the Regional Center of Allergy and Clinical Immunology was 1.5% in 2015, 2.7% in 2016, 2.8% in 2017, 3.2% in 2018, 4.2% in 2019 and 2.3% in 2020. The age group with the highest frequency for allergic rhinoconjunctivitis was found in those over 18 years of age; no significant difference was found between men and women. The year 2019 had the highest number of cases. The most common positive allergens in the skin tests of these patients were Dermatophagoides, Cynodon dactylon and Fraxinus americana, for the last two their pollination season were parallel to the peaks where the highest number of consultations were registered in March, April and August. Conclusions: Allergic rhinoconjunctivitis is a disease that has been increasing in recent years and despite the economic and labor burden it represents, there are currently few studies that address the epidemiological characteristics of these patients.

Efficacy of a food supplement Lertal® as an adjuvant therapy of patients with moderate-to-severe seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis

Background Lertal® is an oral food supplement containing 80 mg of dry extract of Perilla frutescens, 150 mg of bioflavonoid quercetin, and 5 μg of vitamin D3. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of Lertal® as a complementary therapy to topical therapy of patients with moderate-to-severe seasonal allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (SAR). Results Seventy (n=70) adult patients with moderate-to-severe SAR were included in this prospective study and treated by four different procedures: (1) 21 patients received azelastine intranasal spray for 30 days and, after that, azelastine spray and Lertal® tablets for the next 30 days; (2) 19 patients received combined azelastine with fluticasone intranasal spray for 30 days and azelastine with fluticasone spray and Lertal® tablets for the next 30 days; (3) 15 patients received azelastine spray only for 60 days; (4) 15 patients received combined azelastine with fluticasone spray only for 60 days. Levels of SAR symptoms (sneezing, tearing, ocular itching, rhinorrhea, nasal obstruction, hyposmia, and cough), as well as Total Symptom Scores (TSS), were evaluated at the start of this investigation (visit 0), after 30 days of treatment (visit 1), and after 60 days of treatment (visit 2) using a visual analog scale. After 30 days of treatment, better effects were achieved in groups in which patients were treated with combined (antihistamine with corticosteroid) spray. After 60 days of therapy, we found the best effects in procedure 2 and slightly worse effects in procedure 1. The high differences in the reduction of TSS between the 60th and 30th day were found for procedure 2 (p<0.001) and procedure 1 (p<0.001). The worse improvement of symptoms we found was in procedure 4 (p<0.01), and, for the procedure 3, we found no significant difference (p=0.140). None of the patients reported adverse effects during the therapy. Conclusion Our results suggest that addition of food supplement Lertal® to the standard topical therapy of patients with moderate-to-severe SAR increases the effects of intranasal therapy in reducing nasal and ocular symptoms.