International archives of allergy and immunology · 2010
Clinical value of conjunctival allergen challenge in diagnosing allergic conjunctivitis related to latex.
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.
Chelminska Marta, Niedoszytko Marek, Jassem Ewa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The clinical value of conjunctival allergen challenge (CAC) with latex allergen in patients with allergic conjunctivitis remains undefined. The aim of this study was to assess the value of conjunctival allergen challenge with latex extract in a group of patients with latex sensitization and a history of conjunctivitis after contact with latex products.
METHODS: Fifty patients who had symptoms of conjunctivitis following contact with latex were studied. The control group consisted of 30 subjects without any symptoms of conjunctivitis, negative skin prick test and sIgE <0.35 kU/l for latex. Questionnaires on signs and symptoms, skin prick tests with latex, sIgE and CAC with latex extract were administered. The study was performed at the Department of Allergology of the Medical University of Gdansk in Poland.
RESULTS: CAC with latex was positive in 46 patients (92%) and in none of the control group. CAC was the most sensitive diagnostic method (92% sensitivity and 100% specificity). The sensitivity of other methods (skin prick test and sIgE) was lower: 84 and 88%, respectively. Provocation did not induce any serious adverse events.
CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated the high sensitivity and safety of CAC with the extract of latex allergens in the diagnosis of patients with latex allergy. This method may be considered a diagnostic option in cases with uncertain diagnosis.
METHODS: Fifty patients who had symptoms of conjunctivitis following contact with latex were studied. The control group consisted of 30 subjects without any symptoms of conjunctivitis, negative skin prick test and sIgE <0.35 kU/l for latex. Questionnaires on signs and symptoms, skin prick tests with latex, sIgE and CAC with latex extract were administered. The study was performed at the Department of Allergology of the Medical University of Gdansk in Poland.
RESULTS: CAC with latex was positive in 46 patients (92%) and in none of the control group. CAC was the most sensitive diagnostic method (92% sensitivity and 100% specificity). The sensitivity of other methods (skin prick test and sIgE) was lower: 84 and 88%, respectively. Provocation did not induce any serious adverse events.
CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated the high sensitivity and safety of CAC with the extract of latex allergens in the diagnosis of patients with latex allergy. This method may be considered a diagnostic option in cases with uncertain diagnosis.