Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology · 2011
Seafood allergy in children: a descriptive study.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Turner Paul, Ng Ian, Kemp Andrew, Campbell Dianne
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Food allergy and seafood (fish, mollusk, and crustacean) consumption have increased considerably over the past 40 years. Seafood allergy is now a leading cause of anaphylaxis in both the United States and Australia. However, there is only limited published data describing the clinical presentation and management of seafood allergy.
OBJECTIVES: To describe the characteristics of a large cohort of children with seafood allergy.
METHODS: Using a retrospective chart review, we collected data on all children presenting to our Tertiary Allergy Service with an allergic reaction to seafood between 2006 and 2009.
RESULTS: 167 children had a history of definite clinical reaction to seafood and/or positive food challenge (103 male, 62%). 94% had evidence of co-existent atopic disease. Prawn/shrimp was the most common seafood implicated. One-fifth presented with a history of anaphylaxis to seafood. Over 50% of crustacean-allergic children could tolerate non-crustacean fish. Sensitization to other fish species was very common in fish-allergic children, with one third reporting clinical reactions to at least two species; 16% developed symptoms to fish vapours. In children with allergy to tuna and/or salmon, at least 21% were able to tolerate the fish in a tinned form.
CONCLUSIONS: Seafood is a relatively common and important cause of food allergy in Australian children, presenting with a high rate of anaphylaxis.
OBJECTIVES: To describe the characteristics of a large cohort of children with seafood allergy.
METHODS: Using a retrospective chart review, we collected data on all children presenting to our Tertiary Allergy Service with an allergic reaction to seafood between 2006 and 2009.
RESULTS: 167 children had a history of definite clinical reaction to seafood and/or positive food challenge (103 male, 62%). 94% had evidence of co-existent atopic disease. Prawn/shrimp was the most common seafood implicated. One-fifth presented with a history of anaphylaxis to seafood. Over 50% of crustacean-allergic children could tolerate non-crustacean fish. Sensitization to other fish species was very common in fish-allergic children, with one third reporting clinical reactions to at least two species; 16% developed symptoms to fish vapours. In children with allergy to tuna and/or salmon, at least 21% were able to tolerate the fish in a tinned form.
CONCLUSIONS: Seafood is a relatively common and important cause of food allergy in Australian children, presenting with a high rate of anaphylaxis.