Risk factors for multiple epinephrine doses in food-triggered anaphylaxis in children

Anaphylaxis: A 2023 practice parameter update

This practice parameter update focuses on 7 areas in which there are new evidence and new recommendations. Diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis have been revised, and patterns of anaphylaxis are defined. Measurement of serum tryptase is important for diagnosis of anaphylaxis and to identify underlying mast cell disorders. In infants and toddlers, age-specific symptoms may differ from older children and adults, patient age is not correlated with reaction severity, and anaphylaxis is unlikely to be the initial reaction to an allergen on first exposure. Different community settings for anaphylaxis require specific measures for prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis. Optimal prescribing and use of epinephrine autoinjector devices require specific counseling and training of patients and caregivers, including when and how to administer the epinephrine autoinjector and whether and when to call 911. If epinephrine is used promptly, immediate activation of emergency medical services may not be required if the patient experiences a prompt, complete, and durable response. For most medical indications, the risk of stopping or changing beta-blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor medication may exceed the risk of more severe anaphylaxis if the medication is continued, especially in patients with insect sting anaphylaxis. Evaluation for mastocytosis, including a bone marrow biopsy, should be considered for adult patients with severe insect sting anaphylaxis or recurrent idiopathic anaphylaxis. After perioperative anaphylaxis, repeat anesthesia may proceed in the context of shared decision-making and based on the history and results of diagnostic evaluation with skin tests or in vitro tests when available, and supervised challenge when necessary.

Refractory Anaphylaxis: A New Entity for Severe Anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis reactions lie on a spectrum of severity, ranging from relatively mild lower respiratory involvement (depending on the definition of anaphylaxis used) to more severe reactions that are refractory to initial treatment with epinephrine and may rarely cause death. A variety of grading scales exist to characterize severe reactions, but there is a lack of consensus about the optimal approach to define severity. More recently, a new entity called refractory anaphylaxis (RA) has emerged in the literature, characterized by the persistence of anaphylaxis despite initial epinephrine treatment. However, slightly different definitions have been proposed to date. In this Rostrum, we review these definitions as well as data relating to epidemiology, elicitors, risk factors, and management of RA. We propose a need to align the different definitions for RA, to improve epidemiological surveillance, advance our understanding of the pathophysiology of RA, and optimize management strategies to reduce morbidity and mortality.

IgE-mediated cow's milk allergy in Brazilian children: Outcomes of oral food challenge

Background

Oral food challenge (OFC) is useful for diagnosing food allergies and assessing tolerance, but severe reactions may occur during the procedure.

Objective

To characterize the frequency and severity of reactions during cow's milk (CM) OFCs.

Methods

A cross-sectional study was conducted to analyze the outcome of cow's milk oral food challenges (CMOFCs) performed to confirm IgE-mediated CM allergy or to assess food tolerance. CM was given first as baked milk (BM), followed by whole CM if there was no prior reaction to BM. An OFC was considered positive if IgE-mediated symptoms developed up to 2 h after ingestion. Symptoms were described and variables including age at OFC, prior anaphylaxis, other atopic diseases, and skin test results were compared according to the OFC outcomes.

Results

A total of 266 CMOFCs were performed, including 159 patients with a median age of 6.3 years old. One hundred thirty-six tests were positive and 62 resulted in anaphylaxis. Thirty-nine anaphylactic reactions were observed up to 30 min after the first dose. Severe anaphylaxis (cardiovascular and/or neurological involvement) was reported in 5 tests. A second dose of epinephrine was required in 3 tests, and 1 presented a biphasic response. Younger patients had a higher risk of anaphylaxis during baked milk oral food challenge (BMOFC) (p = 0.009). The frequency of anaphylaxis was higher in patients submitted to BM (p = 0.009).

Conclusions

Anaphylaxis is a known complication of CMOFCs even when there is no prior anaphylaxis or when conducted with baked products. This study reinforces the importance of conducting OFC in appropriate settings with a well-trained team.

Recognition and Management of Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis in the School and Community Setting

Given the increasing prevalence of food allergy, schools and food service establishments must have procedures in place to accommodate those with the condition. Training staff on allergy management has been shown to improve knowledge and skills, although more research is needed to better understand its benefits. Furthermore, although there are challenges involved in maintaining unassigned stock epinephrine programs, they have the potential to reduce morbidity and mortality associated with anaphylaxis by improving access to potentially life-saving medication. Finally, food bans in schools may not be an effective part of food allergy management, and other measures should be considered instead.

Use of multiple epinephrine doses in anaphylaxis: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Regulatory bodies recommend that all patients at risk of anaphylaxis be prescribed 2 epinephrine autoinjectors, which they should carry at all times. This is in contrast to some guidelines. The proportion of anaphylaxis reactions that are treated with multiple doses of epinephrine has not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to undertake a systematic review and meta-analysis of published studies reporting epinephrine treatment for anaphylaxis in which data relating to the number of doses administered were available.

METHODS

We searched the Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases for relevant studies reporting at least 10 anaphylaxis events (due to food or venom) from 1946 until January 2020. Data were extracted in duplicate for the meta-analysis, and the risk of bias was assessed. The study was registered under the PROSPERO identifier CRD42017069109.

RESULTS

A total of 86 studies (36,557 anaphylaxis events) met the inclusion criteria (20 of the studies [23%] were prospective studies; 64 [74%] reported reactions in the community, and 22 [26%] included food challenge data). Risk of bias was assessed as low in 50 studies. Overall, 7.7% of anaphylaxis events from any cause (95% CI = 6.4-9.1) were treated with multiple doses of epinephrine. When only epinephrine-treated reactions for which subsequent doses were administered by a health care professional were considered, 11.1% of food-induced reactions (95% CI = 9.4-13.2) and 17.1% of venom-induced reactions (95% CI = 11.3-25.0) were treated with more than 1 epinephrine dose. Heterogeneity was moderate to high in the meta-analyses, but at sensitivity analysis this estimate was not affected by study design or anaphylaxis definition.

CONCLUSION

Around 1 in 10 anaphylaxis reactions are treated with more than 1 dose of epinephrine.