JA clinical reports · 2021
Intraoperative anaphylaxis due to aprotinin after local application of fibrin sealant diagnosed by skin tests and basophil activation tests: a case report.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Orihara Masaki, Takazawa Tomonori, Horiuchi Tatsuo, Sakamoto Shinya, Uchiyama Mutsumi, Saito Shigeru
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There are few cases of anaphylaxis after local application of fibrin sealant diagnosed by skin tests.
CASE PRESENTATION: A 49-year-old woman underwent partial lung resection under general anesthesia. Anesthesia was induced uneventfully. Shortly after applying absorbable suture reinforcement felt that contained fibrin sealant, her systolic blood pressure fell to approximately 70 mmHg, along with facial flushing. Anaphylaxis was diagnosed based on the clinical symptoms and high serum tryptase levels. Three months after the event, skin tests were performed with all agents and were positive only for fibrin sealant vial no. 2, whose main component is aprotinin. Subsequently, basophil activation tests using fibrin sealant vial no. 2 and pure aprotinin demonstrated that the causative agent was likely aprotinin.
CONCLUSIONS: We diagnosed aprotinin-induced anaphylaxis using skin tests and basophil activation tests. The occurrence of anaphylaxis should be considered when changes in vital signs are observed after the use of fibrin sealant.
CASE PRESENTATION: A 49-year-old woman underwent partial lung resection under general anesthesia. Anesthesia was induced uneventfully. Shortly after applying absorbable suture reinforcement felt that contained fibrin sealant, her systolic blood pressure fell to approximately 70 mmHg, along with facial flushing. Anaphylaxis was diagnosed based on the clinical symptoms and high serum tryptase levels. Three months after the event, skin tests were performed with all agents and were positive only for fibrin sealant vial no. 2, whose main component is aprotinin. Subsequently, basophil activation tests using fibrin sealant vial no. 2 and pure aprotinin demonstrated that the causative agent was likely aprotinin.
CONCLUSIONS: We diagnosed aprotinin-induced anaphylaxis using skin tests and basophil activation tests. The occurrence of anaphylaxis should be considered when changes in vital signs are observed after the use of fibrin sealant.