No evidence for contraindications to the use of propofol in adults allergic to egg, soy or peanut†

Why sedative hypnotics often fail in development

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Drug development to support anaesthesia and sedation has been slow with few candidates emerging from preclinical discovery and limited innovation beyond attempted reformulation of existing compounds.

RECENT FINDINGS

The market is well supported by low-cost generic products and development compounds have not been shown to improve patient outcomes or possess other distinctive characteristics to justify the cost of development.

SUMMARY

To make progress in a large-volume, low margin and highly competitive environment requires meaningful advances in relevant basic science. Opportunities exist, but probably require bolder initiatives than further attempts at reformulation or fiddling with the structure of propofol. Extending development ambitions to include nonanaesthesiologist providers challenges professional boundaries but may facilitate cost-effective changes in patterns of care.

[Diagnostics of drug allergies and intolerances]

The prevalence of hypersensitivity reactions to drugs is increasing. Currently, this affects more than 7% of the world population. Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) and beta-lactam antibiotics (BLA) are by far the most common pharmaceutical preparations involved in hypersensitivity reactions to drugs. Misdiagnoses are frequent and BLA allergies present a danger that can lead to adverse health outcomes. Therefore, delabeling (exclusion of a suspected diagnosis) is paramount for those affected. Following the occurrence of uncomplicated maculopapular exanthemas, outpatient oral drug provocation can be safely considered in children without prior skin tests. Immediate perioperative reactions are rare. The approach to studying these complex reactions requires collaboration between allergologists and anesthesiologists to provide the best possible care for these patients.

Perioperative Hypersensitivity Evaluation and Management: A Practical Approach

Perioperative hypersensitivity (POH) is an uncommon, potentially life-threatening event. Identification of POH can be difficult given the lack of familiarity, physiological effects of anesthesia, draping of the patient during surgery, and potential nonimmunological factors contributing to signs and symptoms. Given the unique nature and large number of medications administered in the perioperative setting, evaluation of POH can be challenging. In this paper, we present a practical approach to management with an emphasis on understanding what happens in the operating room, the overlap of signs and symptoms between nonimmunological and immunological reactions, acute management, and subsequent evaluation. In addition, we provide a strategy for further review of an initially negative evaluation and emphasize the importance of establishing management plans for the patient as well as providing recommendations to the medical, anesthesia, and surgical teams for future surgeries. A critical factor for successful management at all points in the process is a close collaboration between the anesthesia and the allergy teams.

Allergic and other adverse reactions to drugs used in anesthesia and surgery

The list of drugs patients may be exposed to during the perioperative and postoperative periods is potentially extensive. It includes induction agents, neuromuscular blocking drugs (NMBDs), opioids, antibiotics, sugammadex, colloids, local anesthetics, polypeptides, antifibrinolytic agents, heparin and related anticoagulants, blue dyes, chlorhexidine, and a range of other agents depending on several factors related to individual patients’ clinical condition and progress in the postoperative recovery period. To avoid poor or ultrarapid metabolizers to a particular drug (for example tramadol and codeine) or possible adverse drug reactions (ADRs), some drugs may need to be avoided during or after surgery. This will be the case for patients with a history of anaphylaxis or other adverse events/intolerances to a known drug. Other drugs may be ceased for a period before surgery, e.g., anticoagulants that increase the chance of bleeding; diuretics for patients with acute renal failure; antihypertensives relative to kidney injury after major vascular surgery; and serotonergic drugs that together with some opioids may rarely induce serotonin toxicity. Studies of germline variations shown by genotyping and phenotyping to identify a predisposition of genetic factors to ADRs offer an increasingly important approach to individualize drug therapy. Studies of associations of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) genes with some serious delayed immune-mediated reactions are ongoing and variations of drug-metabolizing cytochrome CYP450 enzymes, P-glycoprotein, and catechol-O -methyltransferase show promise for the assessment of ADRs and non-responses to drugs, particularly opioids and other analgesics. Surveys of ADRs from an increasing number of institutions often cover small numbers of patients, are retrospective in nature, fail to clearly identify culprit drugs, and do not adequately distinguish immune-mediated from non-immune-mediated anaphylactoid reactions. From the many surveys undertaken, the large list of agents identified during and after anesthesia and surgery are examined for their ADR involvement. Drugs are classified into those most often involved, (NMBD and antibiotics); drugs that are becoming more frequently implicated, namely antibiotics (particularly teicoplanin), and blue dyes; those becoming less frequently involved; and drugs more rarely involved in perioperative, and postoperative adverse reactions but still important and necessary to keep in mind for the occasional potential sensitive patient. Clinicians should be aware of the similarities between drug-induced true allergic type I IgE/FcεRI- and pseudoallergic MRGPRX2-mediated ADRs, the clinical features of each, and their distinguishing characteristics. Procedures for identifying MRGPRX2 agonists and diagnosing and distinguishing pseudoallergic from allergic reaction mechanisms are discussed.

Rapid sequence intubation and the role of the emergency medicine pharmacist: 2022 update

PURPOSE

The dosing, potential adverse effects, and clinical outcomes of the most commonly utilized pharmacologic agents for rapid sequence intubation (RSI) are reviewed for the practicing emergency medicine pharmacist (EMP).

SUMMARY

RSI is the process of establishing a safe, functional respiratory system in patients unable to effectively breathe on their own. Various medications are chosen to sedate and even paralyze the patient to facilitate an efficient endotracheal intubation. The mechanism of action and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles of these agents were described in a 2011 review. Since then, the role of the EMP as well as the published evidence regarding RSI agents, including dosing, adverse effects, and clinical outcomes, has grown. It is necessary for the practicing EMP to update previous practice patterns in order to continue to provide optimal patient care.

CONCLUSION

While the agents used in RSI have changed little, knowledge regarding optimal dosing, appropriate patient selection, and possible adverse effects continues to be gained. The EMP is a key member of the bedside care team and uniquely positioned to communicate this evolving data.

Do cross-food allergies to propofol exist?

BACKGROUND

Propofol is a short and rapidly acting intravenous anesthetic extensively used for the induction and maintenance of general anesthesia. It is a lipid emulsion that contains soybean oil, purified egg phosphatide, and egg lecithin. Therefore, the package leaflet indicates that its administration is contraindicated in patients allergic to soy, eggs, or peanuts. Our study aimed to determine whether patients with proven food allergies are allergic to propofol.

METHODS

Patients of all ages allergic to soy, eggs, or peanuts who agreed to undergo skin testing for propofol allergies were included. The subjects first underwent a skin test to confirm food allergies. If candidates were negative, they were excluded. If the result was positive, a propofol skin test was performed.

RESULTS

Sixty-four patients with confirmed food allergies underwent a propofol skin test. Only one was positive in the propofol skin test (1.6%). The patient was allergic to peanuts and soybeans. These results reinforce the idea that there is no justification for avoiding propofol use in these subjects.

CONCLUSIONS

Propofol can be safely administered to patients allergic to soy, eggs, or peanuts. We recommend caution in patients with a history of anaphylaxis after ingestion of the above-mentioned foods.

Successful recording of direct cortical motor-evoked potential from a pediatric patient under remimazolam anesthesia: a case report

Background

Intraoperative motor-evoked potential (MEP) monitoring reduces postoperative motor deficits. Propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia is the gold standard for intraoperative myogenic MEPs. Although there is no contraindication to administering propofol in adults with peanut, soy, or egg allergies, its safety in children with these allergies remains unclear.

Case presentation

A 12-year-old girl required general anesthesia under intraoperative direct cortical MEP (dc-MEP) monitoring due to supratentorial glioma. Remimazolam-based anesthesia was selected, instead of propofol, due to the patient’s egg hypersensitivity. Stable myogenic MEPs were recorded throughout the surgery with remimazolam at 0.9 mg/kg/h and remifentanil at 0.35 μg/kg/min, following adjustments of stimulation intensity and titration of remimazolam infusion. Neither intraoperative memory nor motor deficits were present after surgery.

Conclusions

We present a pediatric case whose dc-MEP was recorded under remimazolam anesthesia. The cardiovascular stability and avoidance of propofol infusion syndrome with remimazolam were superior to propofol.

Comparison of Intra and Post-operative Sedation efficacy of Dexmedetomidine-Midazolam and Dexmedetomidine-Propofol for Major Abdominal Surgery

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness and side effects of dexmedetomidine (DEX) in combination with midazolam and propofol have not been comparatively studied in a single clinical trial as sedative agents to general anesthesia before.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study is to compare intra and post-operative sedation between DEX-Midazolam and DEX-Propofol in patients who underwent major abdominal surgery on the duration of general anesthesia, hemodynamic and sedation effect.

METHOD

This prospective, randomized, double-blinded clinical trial included 50 patients who were 20 to 60 years of age and admitted for major abdominal surgery. The patients were randomly assigned by a computer-generated random numbers table to sedation with DEX plus midazolam (DM group) (n=25) or DEX plus propofol (DP group) (n=25). In the DM group, patients received a bolus dose of 0.1 mg/kg of midazolam and immediately initiated the intravenous (i.v.) infusion of DEX 1 µg/kg over a 10 min and 0.5 µg/kg/hr by continuous i.v. infusion within operation period. In the DP group, patients received pre-anesthetic i.v. DEX 1 µg/kg over 15 min before anesthesia induction and 0.2-1 µg/kg/hr by continuous i.v. infusion during the operative period. After preoxygenation for at least 2 min, during the surgery, patients received propofol infusion dose of 250 μg/kg/min for 15 min then a basal infusion dose of 50 μg/kg/min. The bispectral index (BIS) value, as well as mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), oxygen saturation (SaO2), percutaneous arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2) and end-tidal carbon dioxide tension (ETCO2) were recorded before anesthesia (T0), during anesthesia (at 15-min intervals throughout the surgical procedure), by a blinded observer. Evidence of apnea, hypotension, hypertension and hypoxemia were recorded during surgery.

RESULTS

The hemodynamic changes, including HR, MAP, BIS, VT, SaO2, and RR had a downward tendency with time, but no significant difference was observed between the groups (P>0.05). However, the two groups showed no significant differences in ETCO2 and SPO2 values in any of the assessed interval (P>0.05). In this study, the two groups showed no significant differences in the incidence of nausea, vomiting, coughing, apnea, hypotension, hypertension, bradycardia and hypoxemia (P>0.05). Respiratory depression and serious adverse events were not reported in either group. Extubation time after surgery was respectively 6.3 ± 1.7 and 5.8 ± 1.4 hr. in the DM and DP groups and the difference was not statistically significant (P= 0.46).

CONCLUSION

Our study showed no significant differences between the groups in hemodynamic and respiratory changes in each of the time intervals. There were also no significant differences between the two groups in the incidence of complication intra and post-operative. Further investigations are required to specify the optimum doses of using drugs which provide safety in cardiovascular and respiratory system without adverse disturbance during surgery.

A Review of Sedation Agents

The oral and maxillofacial surgery model of anesthesia delivery is the subject of some controversy. However, a long track record of patient safety provides compelling support for the dual role of the oral and maxillofacial surgeon as proceduralist and anesthetist. Among the elements critical to continued success is a clear understanding of the pharmacology of the agents used to produce sedation and general anesthesia. This review highlights 6 sedation agents used as part of a balanced anesthesia technique in oral and maxillofacial surgery.

BSACI 2021 guideline for the management of egg allergy

This guideline advises on the management of patients with egg allergy. Most commonly egg allergy presents in infancy, with a prevalence of approximately 2% in children and 0.1% in adults. A clear clinical history will confirm the diagnosis in most cases. Investigation by measuring egg-specific IgE (by skin prick testing or specific IgE assay) is useful in moderate-severe cases or where there is diagnostic uncertainty. Following an acute allergic reaction, egg avoidance advice should be provided. Egg allergy usually resolves, and reintroduction can be achieved at home if reactions have been mild and there is no asthma. Patients with a history of severe reactions or asthma should have reintroduction guided by a specialist. All children with egg allergy should receive the MMR vaccine. Most adults and children with egg allergy can receive the influenza vaccine in primary care, unless they have had anaphylaxis to egg requiring intensive care support. Yellow Fever vaccines should only be considered in egg-allergic patients under the guidance of an allergy specialist. This guideline was prepared by the Standards of Care Committee (SOCC) of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) and is intended for allergists and others with a special interest in allergy. The recommendations are evidence based. Where evidence was lacking, consensus was reached by the panel of specialists on the committee. The document encompasses epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis and co-morbid associations.

Investigation of perioperative hypersensitivity reactions: an update

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to provide an update on how best to manage the investigation of suspected perioperative hypersensitivity reactions based on recent literature and key publications.

RECENT FINDINGS

In the past two years, several very important initiatives have been taken in the field of perioperative hypersensitivity. The 6th national audit project in the United Kingdom has provided new knowledge through a series of studies, including a nationwide prospective study, and the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology has commissioned a position paper with updated recommendations for investigations. Lastly, a large international working group comprising experts in anesthesiology, allergology, and immunology, the International Suspected Perioperative Allergic Reactions group, has published a series of articles providing updates and new insights into several different key areas of perioperative hypersensitivity.

SUMMARY

The investigation of perioperative hypersensitivity reactions is highly complex and aims to identify the correct culprit to ensure future avoidance but also to disprove allergy to other suspected culprits, making them available for subsequent anesthesia. To achieve this, close collaboration between anesthesiologists and allergists is called upon to ensure the best possible outcome for the patient.

New perspectives on propofol allergy

PURPOSE

Propofol is an intravenous sedative used in many patient populations and care settings. Although generally considered safe and effective, the drug has historically been avoided in patients with reported allergies to egg, soy, and/or peanut on the basis of the manufacturer's prescribing information. Concerns exist for potential adverse events, increased medication costs, reduced efficacy, and risk of medication errors when using alternative agents. Here we present a critical examination of the literature concerning cross-reactivity of food allergies with propofol to provide evidence-based recommendations for the evaluation and management of potential allergic reactions.

SUMMARY

Literature regarding the history of propofol allergy warnings and clinical trial data were assessed to provide an alternative perspective on avoidance of propofol in patients with food allergies. Suspected trigger molecules are discussed with evaluation of the antigenic potential of excipient ingredients used in the manufacture of multiple propofol formulations. Evidence-based recommendations are provided for pharmacist-led screening of adult patients with reported food allergies to support selection of propofol or alternative therapy.

CONCLUSION

There is a lack of definitive evidence that propofol must be routinely avoided in patients with reported allergies to egg, soy, and/or peanut products. Data from clinical trials suggest that propofol is safe for patients with nonanaphylactic food allergies. Patients who do experience allergic reactions following administration of propofol should undergo further testing to definitively identify the specific trigger and prevent future unnecessary avoidance of preferred medication regimens. Pharmacists can play an important role in interviewing patients with reported food allergies to better determine the risk vs benefit of propofol avoidance.

Perioperative Anaphylaxis: Evaluation and Management

Perioperative anaphylaxis (PA) is a rare but life-threatening condition that poses diagnostic and management challenges in the operating room. The incidence of severe perioperative reactions is estimated to be approximately 1:7000-10,000. Management involves both immediate stabilization of the patient and identifying the culprit agent. Identification is essential to prevent recurrence of the event in subsequent surgeries and to avoid unnecessary labeling of drug allergy. Identifying all possible exposures including medications, disinfectants, latex, and dyes and choosing the appropriate tests are essential for proper evaluation. To identify the culprit, primary testing modalities include tryptase at the time of the reaction with subsequent levels and skin testing with nonirritating concentrations to the medications and substances utilized during the procedure and those potentially used as alternates. This strategy provides guidance for future surgeries and procedures. Close collaboration between the allergy, anesthesiology, and surgery teams is essential for appropriate management of these patients at the time of the reaction, during the post event evaluation and in preparation for subsequent surgeries.

Food allergy history and reaction to propofol administration in a large pediatric population

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis to propofol is rare; however, providers face a clinical quandary as medication warnings still exist regarding propofol administration to egg-, soy-, and peanut-allergic patients.

AIMS

The primary aim evaluated the rate of allergic reactions during propofol-containing anesthesia in patients listed allergic to egg, soy, or peanut compared with nonallergic patients who received propofol. The secondary aim evaluated the relationship between food allergy history and allergy testing data.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review conducted between May 2012 and October 2018 identified pediatric patients listed allergic to egg, soy, and/or peanut, who received propofol. Allergy testing and results are presented. Evidence of allergic reaction to propofol during anesthesia was evaluated, and compared with a large nonallergic cohort who received propofol.

RESULTS

Of the 232 392 anesthetics administered, 177 360 (76%) included propofol and 11308 (6%) involved a patient listed allergic to at least 1 index food. A large number of patients had no food allergy testing (n = 6153) or negative testing (n = 2198). Of the 3435 patients listed egg-allergic, 976 tested positive; 750 tested negative; and 1709 had no testing. Of the 2011 patients listed soy-allergic, 322 tested positive; 585 tested negative; and 1104 had no testing. Additionally, 5862 patients were listed peanut-allergic; 1659 tested positive; 863 tested negative and 3340 had no testing. One record of proven propofol anaphylaxis occurred; it was in a patient without a history of food allergies. There were 6 other cases of suspected allergy to propofol. One had a peanut and tree nut allergy and was lost to follow-up; one had no testing available, while 4 patients had positive propofol allergy testing and positive allergy tests to other medications. The rate of proven propofol anaphylaxis during anesthesia in the nonallergic cohort was 0.06/10 000, and the rate in egg- and soy-allergic patients was 0/5446. One patient with a listed peanut allergy had a possible reaction to propofol.

CONCLUSIONS

In the listed food-allergic cohort, the majority had no allergy testing or negative testing. We found no evidence of a relationship between food allergy history and perioperative propofol reaction. We suggest multiply allergic and atopic patients may have a similar likelihood of propofol reaction as with other medications.

Nutritional approach to eosinophilic esophagitis: which diet and when

Dietary elimination therapy has been for a long time an option for patients with eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) and remains the only therapy targeting the cause of the disease. Different dietary approaches have been described along the last 3 decades, and cumulative evidence has defined the effectiveness and usefulness of each approach. Elemental diets are highly effective to induce EoE remission, but unpractical in most patients. Allergy testing-directed food restrictions resulted inefficient to induce remission in a significant proportion of patients (especially adults) and show a low concordance with the dietary causes of EoE. Empiric elimination diets are currently considered the most effective drug-free treatment for patients of all ages with EoE, after widely providing reproducible results. Highly restrictive empiric six-food elimination diets have paved the way to most efficient and less restrictive step-up approaches, which now include four-food and two-food elimination diets. The potential role of milk-elimination, especially in children, should be also considered. Multiple factors including demographics, nutritional status, patient and family lifestyles, social and financial support, and acceptance of repeated endoscopies influence the results of dietary therapy. Dietary therapy in EoE should be patient centered, and the patients and/or their families together with the medical provider should participate in the decision to set up this treatment. This article updates recent knowledge on dietary therapy for EoE and provides guideline to choose the most suitable alternative for patients with EoE, as well as practical tips to achieve the best results in clinical practice.

[Update on perioperative hypersensitivity reactions: joint document from the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) and Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) - Part II: etiology and diagnosis]

This second joint document, written by experts from the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) and Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) concerned with perioperative anaphylaxis, aims to review the pathophysiological reaction mechanisms, triggering agents (in adults and children), and the approach for diagnosis during and after an episode of anaphylaxis. As anaphylaxis assessment is extensive, the identification of medications, antiseptics and other substances used at each setting, the comprehensive data documentation, and the use of standardized nomenclature are key points for obtaining more consistent epidemiological information on perioperative anaphylaxis.

Update on perioperative hypersensitivity reactions: joint document from the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) and Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) - Part II: etiology and diagnosis

This second joint document, written by experts from the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) and Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) concerned with perioperative anaphylaxis, aims to review the pathophysiological reaction mechanisms, triggering agents (in adults and children), and the approach for diagnosis during and after an episode of anaphylaxis. As anaphylaxis assessment is extensive, the identification of medications, antiseptics and other substances used at each setting, the comprehensive data documentation, and the use of standardized nomenclature are key points for obtaining more consistent epidemiological information on perioperative anaphylaxis.

Sedation for Rapid Sequence Induction and Intubation of Neurologically Injured Patients

There are subtle physiologic and pharmacologic principles that should be understood for patients with neurologic injuries. These principles are especially true for managing patients with traumatic brain injuries. Prevention of hypotension and hypoxemia are major goals in the management of these patients. This article discusses the physiology, pitfalls, and pharmacology necessary to skillfully care for this subset of patients with trauma. The principles endorsed in this article are applicable both for patients with traumatic brain injury and those with spinal cord injuries.

Dietary therapy for eosinophilic esophagitis: chances and limitations in the clinical practice

INTRODUCTION

Eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE) is a non-Immunoglobulin E-mediated food allergy that currently represents the main cause of dysphagia and food impaction in children and young adults. Diet remains the only therapy targeting the cause of the disease. Relevant advances in recent years allow novel approaches to dietary therapy in EoE.

AREAS COVERED

An up-to-date review on dietary therapy for EoE is provided, as a potential first-line anti-inflammatory therapy able to induce and maintain remission in a significant proportion of patients. Unpractical elemental diets and suboptimal food allergy testing-directed food restrictions paved the way for empiric elimination diets, which currently are to be considered as the most effective drug-free treatment for EoE. After largely restrictive empiric six-food elimination diets, most efficient step-up approaches now include four-food and two-food elimination diets. The potential of milk-elimination is also discussed.

EXPERT COMMENTARY

An empiric elimination diet step-up strategy should be currently considered as the initial approach for dietary treatment in EoE patients of all ages. Compared to a top-down strategy, step-up diets reduce the need for endoscopic procedures, shorten diagnostic process times, and avoid unnecessary restrictions. Furthermore, early identification of responders with few food triggers may select best candidates for maintenance dietary therapy.

Multiple drug allergies: Recommendations for perioperative management

Life-threatening hypersensitivity reactions are more likely to occur in patients with a history of allergy, atopy, or asthma. Hence, in a patient who presented with a history of multiple drug allergies (MDA), an allergological assessment should be performed prior to surgical procedure. Drug allergies, being one of the causes of catastrophic events occurring in the perioperative period, are of major concern to anesthesiologists. Neuromuscular blocking agents are regularly used during anesthesia and are one of the most common causes of perioperative anaphylaxis. They are estimated to be responsible for 50%-70% of perioperative hypersensitivity reactions. Antibiotics and latex represent the next two groups of drug allergy. Allergic reactions to propofol are rare with an incidence of 1:60,000 exposures. Although intraoperative drug anaphylaxis is rare, it contributes to 4.3% of deaths occurring during general anesthesia. These recommendations discuss pathophysiology of MDA, preoperative evaluation, and anesthesia considerations as well as the prevention and management of allergic reactions in anesthetized patients with a history of MDA.

Perioperative approach of allergic patients

Perioperative allergic reactions are rare, yet important complications of anesthesia. Severe, generalized allergic reactions called anaphylaxis are estimated to have a mortality of 3.5-4.8%. Adequate recognition and handling of a severe perioperative anaphylactic reaction result in better outcomes, including less hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy and death. The diagnosis of a perioperative allergic reaction can be difficult as the list of possible culprits of a perioperative allergic reaction is extensive. Making an informed guess on the causative agent and avoiding this agent in future anesthesia procedures is undesirable and unsafe. Therefore, to ensure future patient safety, a thorough investigation following a perioperative allergic reaction is mandatory. A collaborate approach by allergists and anesthesiologists is advised. In this article, we discuss the basic approach of the allergic patient and of patients with a suspected allergy to perioperatively administered medication.

Lipid Emulsion Therapies and Type 1 Hypersensitivity Reactions: Risk Assessment and Management

Over the past decades, awareness and attention given to food allergies has extended further into the realm of pharmacotherapy. Despite the presence of similar ingredients, different intravenous lipid emulsion (ILE)-based medication products have a wide variety of warnings and contraindications for patients with food allergies. Only limited literature is available to guide clinicians in making appropriate medication therapy adjustments to reduce the risk of hypersensitivity reactions in atopic patient populations. Therefore, the authors sought to develop a comprehensive review of potential risk factors or approaches for management of patients with atopic history and need for ILE therapy. Through thorough review of available literature published worldwide, a description of potential contraindications, risk factors, and evaluation methods is presented. Although the current state of knowledge remains relatively poor, this review aims to provide clinicians a better understanding of which risk factors related to the development of hypersensitivity reactions are relevant to lipid emulsion products and how to best manage patients who may be at risk for severe reaction based on their history. Evaluating personal atopic history is essential to the development of an appropriate risk classification system and approaching an individual's therapeutic options. By applying this assessment to local populations, providers should be able to develop an institutional guideline for screening and minimizing risk of substantial hypersensitivity reactions. Finally, a brief review of methods for managing type 1 hypersensitivity reactions is provided in the event that a breakthrough reaction does occur.

Anaphylaxis in Pregnancy in the United States: Risk Factors and Temporal Trends Using National Routinely Collected Data

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis in pregnancy is an understudied, rare, and severe complication of pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the incidence and temporal trends, and to identify potential risk factors for anaphylaxis-related hospitalizations while pregnant in the United States.

METHODS

All hospitalizations while pregnant and any anaphylactic reactions were identified using International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision, Clinical Modification codes from the National Inpatient Sample, United States, over the period 2004 to 2014. Annual incidence rates of anaphylaxis during pregnancy were calculated. Logistic regression models assessed risk factors for anaphylaxis during pregnancy, presented as odds ratios (ORs) and 95% CIs.

RESULTS

During the period 2004 to 2014, the incidence of anaphylaxis during pregnancy was 3.8 (95% CI, 3.4-4.2) per 100,000 hospitalizations while pregnant. The incidence did not statistically differ during the period 2004 to 2014. After adjustment, there were 3 factors that increased the odds of anaphylaxis during pregnancy: cesarean delivery (adjusted OR [aOR], 4.19; 95% CI, 3.28-5.35) compared with noncesarean delivery; history of an allergic reaction (aOR, 4.05; 95% CI, 2.64-6.23) compared with no history; and a black race (aOR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.15-2.15) and other race (aOR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.08-2.63) compared with white race.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increased rates of cesarean delivery in the United States and consequent drug administration, there was no evidence of an increasing trend in anaphylaxis. Cesarean delivery and history of an allergic reaction allow the identification of women at risk of anaphylaxis. Not all women had clear risk factors, and preparations should always be in place to ensure timely management if this uncommon event occurs.

An EAACI position paper on the investigation of perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions

Perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions are rare. Subsequent allergy investigation is complicated by multiple simultaneous drug exposures, the use of drugs with potent effects and the many differential diagnoses to hypersensitivity in the perioperative setting. The approach to the investigation of these complex reactions is not standardized, and it is becoming increasingly apparent that collaboration between experts in the field of allergy/immunology/dermatology and anaesthesiology is needed to provide the best possible care for these patients. The EAACI task force behind this position paper has therefore combined the expertise of allergists, immunologists and anaesthesiologists. The aims of this position paper were to provide recommendations for the investigation of immediate-type perioperative hypersensitivity reactions and to provide practical information that can assist clinicians in planning and carrying out investigations.

Propofol use in children with allergies to egg, peanut, soybean or other legumes

Propofol is the most commonly administered intravenous agent for anaesthesia in children. However, there are concerns that the emulsified preparation may not be safe in children with an allergy to egg, peanut, soybean or other legumes. We conducted a retrospective study of children with immunologically confirmed egg, peanut, soybean or legume allergy and who underwent general anaesthesia at Princess Margaret Hospital for Children between 2005 and 2015. We extracted details regarding allergy diagnosis, each anaesthetic administered and any adverse events or signs of an allergic reaction in the peri-operative period. A convenience sample of patients without any known food allergies was identified from our prospective anaesthesia research database and acted as a control group. We identified 304 food-allergic children and 649 procedures where propofol was administered. Of these, 201 (66%) had an egg allergy, 226 (74%) had a peanut allergy, 28 (9%) had a soybean allergy and 12 (4%) had a legume allergy. These were compared with 892 allergy-free patients who were exposed to propofol. In 10 (3%) allergy patients and 124 (14%) allergy-free patients, criteria for a possible allergic reaction were met. In nine of the food-allergic children and in all the controls valid non-allergic explanations for the clinical symptoms were found. One likely mild allergic reaction was experienced by a child with a previous history of intralipid allergy. We conclude that genuine serious allergic reaction to propofol is rare and is not reliably predicted by a history of food allergy.

An update on allergy and anaphylaxis in pediatric anesthesia

Childhood allergy is common, and increasing. Many children are incorrectly labeled as having allergy or adverse drug reactions. This can pose a dilemma for anesthetists and lead to a change in practice or drug selection. We review the pathophysiology of hypersensitivity reactions and the implications for anesthesia of food allergy, atopy, and family history of allergy in children. The epidemiology of anaphylaxis is discussed. We discuss the common triggers of perioperative anaphylaxis in children and explore emerging triggers including chlorhexidine and sugammadex. Accurate data on pediatric perioperative anaphylaxis is limited worldwide, with marked geographic variation. This highlights the need for accurate local, district and/or nationwide incident reporting. The clinical features, diagnosis, and management of anaphylaxis under anesthesia are discussed. We review the process of expert allergy testing following a suspected case of anaphylaxis to guide future safe anesthesia administration. The preoperative consultation is an opportunity for referral for allergy testing to allow de-labeling. This has the potential for improved antibiotic stewardship and more effective treatment with first-line therapeutic agents.

Hazardous Medications in Children with Egg, Red Meat, Gelatin, Fish, and Cow's Milk Allergy

Childhood food allergies are a growing public health problem. Once the offending food allergens have been identified, a strict elimination diet is necessary in treatment or prevention of most of the allergic reactions. Accidental food ingestion can lead to severe anaphylaxis. Food- derived substances can be used in medications at various stages of the manufacturing process. In this review, the possible roles of medications which may contain egg, red meat, gelatin, and fish allergens on allergic reactions in children with food allergy were evaluated.

Lidocaine as a Rare and Hidden Allergen in the Perioperative Setting: A Case Report

Local anesthetics are used throughout the health care system. In the perioperative setting and in other settings of exposure to local anesthetics, true allergy is reported very rarely. We present an unusual case of immediate-type perioperative hypersensitivity to lidocaine with cross-reaction to mepivacaine, which was missed on initial investigation. This case illustrates that lidocaine may be a "hidden allergen" in the perioperative setting and should always be considered a potential culprit in cases of suspected perioperative hypersensitivity. The case also demonstrates that suspected perioperative hypersensitivity requires highly specialized investigation and close collaboration between allergists and anesthesiologists.

Peri-Operative Anaphylaxis-An Investigational Challenge

Patients with suspected peri-operative anaphylaxis (POP) require thorough investigation to identify underlying trigger(s) and enable safe anesthesia for subsequent surgery. The changing epidemiology of POP has been striking. Previous estimates of the incidence of POP have ranged between 1:6,000 and1:20,000 anesthetics, but more recent data from France and the United Kingdom suggest an estimated incidence of 1:10,000. Other important changes include a change in the hierarchy of well-recognized triggers, with antibiotics (beta-lactams) supplanting neuromuscular blockers (NMB) as the leading cause of POP. The emergence of chlorhexidine, patent blue dye, and teicoplanin as important triggers have also been noteworthy findings. The mainstay of investigation revolves around critical analysis of the time-line of events leading up to anaphylaxis coupled with judicious skin testing. Skin tests have limitations with respect to unknown predictive values for most drugs/agents and therefore, knowledge of background positivity in healthy controls, test characteristics of individual drugs and the use of non-irritant concentrations is essential to avoid both false-positive and false-negative results. Specific IgE assays for individual drugs are available only for a limited number of agents and are not a substitute for skin testing. Acute serum total tryptase has a high specificity and positive predictive value in IgE-mediated POP anaphylaxis but is limited by its moderate sensitivity and negative predictive value. Planning for safe anesthesia in this group of patients is particularly challenging and consequently anesthetists need to be alert to the possibility of repeat episodes of anaphylaxis. Because of the limitations of current investigations for POP, collecting systematic data on the outcome of repeat anesthesia is valuable in validating current investigatory approaches. This paper reviews the changing epidemiology of POP with reference to the main triggers, and the investigation and outcome of subsequent anesthesia.

Progression of systemic lupus erythematosus associated with propofol administration: a case report

Propofol is a sedative-hypnotic agent used as a general anaesthetic with a good safety profile. However, the potential risk for patients with systemic lupuserythematosus (SLE) receiving propofol remains unclear. We report the case of a patient who received an intravenous infusion of propofol for painless gastroscopy which exacerbated acute SLE despite no history of allergies. The adverse effect might be because propofol increased T helper cells and trigged the induction of B cell differentiation and plasmablast formation, which further promoted the secretion of auto-antibodies. This case shows that propofol can exacerbate SLE symptoms in some patients and highlights the importance of identifying potential immune-related factors before propofol administration, especially in patients with autoimmune diseases. It is important to be aware of and differentiate this uncommon and non-specific SLE manifestation from a myriad of disorders presenting with a primary digestive disorder in the outpatient clinic.

Anaesthetic management of patients with pre-existing allergic conditions: a narrative review

This narrative review seeks to distinguish the clinical patterns of pre-existing allergic conditions from other confounding non-allergic clinical entities, and to identify the potential related risks and facilitate their perioperative management. Follow-up investigation should be performed after a perioperative immediate hypersensitivity to establish a diagnosis and provide advice for subsequent anaesthetics, the main risk factor for perioperative immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated anaphylaxis being a previous uninvestigated perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reaction. The concept of cross-reactivity between drugs used in the perioperative setting and food is often quoted, but usually not supported by evidence. There is no reason to avoid propofol in egg, soy, or peanut allergy. The allergenic determinants have been characterised for fish, shellfish, and povidone iodine, but remain unknown for iodinated contrast agents. Iodinated drugs may be used in seafood allergy. Evidence supporting the risk for protamine allergy in fish allergy and in neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin use is lacking. Conversely, cross-reactivity to gelatin-based colloid may occur in α-gal syndrome. Atopy and allergic asthma along with other non-allergic conditions, such as NSAID-exacerbated respiratory disease, chronic urticaria, mastocytosis, and hereditary or acquired angioedema, are not risk factors for IgE-mediated drug allergy, but there is a perioperative risk associated with the potential for exacerbation of the various conditions.

Comparative epidemiology of suspected perioperative hypersensitivity reactions

Suspected perioperative hypersensitivity reactions are rare but contribute significantly to the morbidity and mortality of surgical procedures. Recent publications have highlighted the differences between countries concerning the respective risk of different drugs, and changes in patterns of causal agents and the emergence of new allergens. This review summarises recent information on the epidemiology of perioperative hypersensitivity reactions, with specific consideration of differences between geographic areas for the most frequently involved offending agents.

Allergy alerts - The incidence of parentally reported allergies in children presenting for general anesthesia

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Pediatric patients increasingly report allergies, including allergies to food and medications. We sought to determine the incidence and, nature of parent-reported allergies in children presenting for surgery and its significance for anesthetists.

METHODS

We prospectively collected data on admissions through our surgical admission unit over a 2-month period at a pediatric tertiary care teaching hospital. Data collected included patient demographics, history of atopy, with more comprehensive information collected if an allergy was reported. A clinical immunologist and an anesthetist reviewed the documentation of all patients reporting an allergy.

RESULTS

We reviewed 1001 pediatric patients, 158 (15.8%) patients with parent-reported allergies; to medications/drugs (n = 73), food (n = 66), environmental allergens (dust/grasses, n = 35), tapes/dressings (n = 27), latex (n = 4), and venom (eg, bee, wasp, n = 9). Forty-one patients reported antibiotic allergies, with Beta-lactam antibiotics being the most common, with the majority presenting with rash alone (57%). Ten patients reported allergies to nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and eight to opioids. Twenty-four patients reported egg and/or peanut allergy. Only 3/1001 (0.3%) patients were deemed to have evidence of likely IgE-mediated drug allergy. Of the reported allergies, only 60 (38.2%) had been investigated prior, most likely to be followed up were food (53%) and environmental allergies (44.4%). Only 4/73 (5.5%) reported medication allergies had further follow-up. Just four patients (0.4% of the entire cohort) had drug sensitivities/allergies that were likely to majorly alter anesthesia practice.

CONCLUSION

Only the minority of parent-reported allergies in pediatric surgical patients were specialist confirmed and likely to be clinically relevant. Self-reported food allergy is commonly specialist verified whereas reactions to medications were generally not. Over-reporting of allergies is increasingly common and limits clinician choice of medications. Better education of patients and their families and more timely verification or dismissal of parent-reported reactions is urgently needed.