Annals of allergy, asthma & immunology : official publication of the American College of Allergy, Asthma, & Immunology · 2006
Occupational respiratory allergy to roe deer.
Клинический случайСтатьяНазвание 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.
Carballada Francisco, Sánchez Rafael, Carballas Clara, Lombardero Manuel, Boquete Manuel
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although scattered reports have been published on roe deer allergenicity, no systematic studies of allergenicity or possible cross-reactions have appeared.
OBJECTIVES: To describe 2 patients with occupational roe deer allergy, demonstrated by positive skin and conjunctival provocation test results, and to note cross-reactions to other animal (mainly cow) allergens.
METHODS: Two workers at animal rehabilitation centers were sensitized to roe deer. One patient had a history of rhinoconjunctivitis and the other a history of rhinoconjunctivitis and probable asthma. Both patients underwent skin testing with a standard battery of inhaled and epithelial allergens and with roe deer hair and dander extract and conjunctival provocation tests with roe deer hair extract. Immunodetection for IgE (both patients) and IgE immunoblot inhibition tests to determine inhibitory effect (1 patient) were also performed.
RESULTS: The results of skin tests and conjunctival provocation tests showed that both patients were sensitized to roe deer allergens. In one patient specific IgE to roe deer extract was detected, and this extract completely inhibited IgE binding to cow hair and dander extract in immunoblotting tests. Specific IgE to roe deer proteins could not be demonstrated in the other patient.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that roe deer epidermal derivatives can cause occupational respiratory disease in exposed workers and that allergy to this species should be considered in individuals who present with similar symptoms and exposure histories. Immunoblot inhibition studies suggested the possibility of cross-reaction between roe deer proteins and cow proteins.
OBJECTIVES: To describe 2 patients with occupational roe deer allergy, demonstrated by positive skin and conjunctival provocation test results, and to note cross-reactions to other animal (mainly cow) allergens.
METHODS: Two workers at animal rehabilitation centers were sensitized to roe deer. One patient had a history of rhinoconjunctivitis and the other a history of rhinoconjunctivitis and probable asthma. Both patients underwent skin testing with a standard battery of inhaled and epithelial allergens and with roe deer hair and dander extract and conjunctival provocation tests with roe deer hair extract. Immunodetection for IgE (both patients) and IgE immunoblot inhibition tests to determine inhibitory effect (1 patient) were also performed.
RESULTS: The results of skin tests and conjunctival provocation tests showed that both patients were sensitized to roe deer allergens. In one patient specific IgE to roe deer extract was detected, and this extract completely inhibited IgE binding to cow hair and dander extract in immunoblotting tests. Specific IgE to roe deer proteins could not be demonstrated in the other patient.
CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that roe deer epidermal derivatives can cause occupational respiratory disease in exposed workers and that allergy to this species should be considered in individuals who present with similar symptoms and exposure histories. Immunoblot inhibition studies suggested the possibility of cross-reaction between roe deer proteins and cow proteins.