Parenteral antihistamines cause hypotension in anaphylaxis

Emergency treatment of peri-operative anaphylaxis: Resuscitation Council UK algorithm for anaesthetists

Peri-operative anaphylaxis is a rare but potentially catastrophic event which must be considered whenever unexpected and significant cardiovascular or respiratory compromise occurs during anaesthesia. The Resuscitation Council UK algorithm for peri-operative anaphylaxis highlights the importance of early intravenous adrenaline and fluid resuscitation and provides guidance on the treatment of refractory anaphylaxis and immediate follow-up. This algorithm is endorsed by the Royal College of Anaesthetists, Association of Anaesthetists, British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and Clinical Immunology Professional Network of the British Society for Immunology. This document was produced by the Perioperative Allergy Network steering committee in collaboration with the Resuscitation Council UK.

Acute Urticaria and Anaphylaxis: Differences and Similarities in Clinical Management

Acute urticaria is a common condition that presents with wheals and/or angioedema. However, these symptoms are also frequent in anaphylaxis, a life-threatening reaction that should be immediately diagnosed and treated. In both, mast cells play a central role in the physiopathology. Causes and triggers of acute urticaria and anaphylaxis are similar in general, but some peculiarities can be observed. The diagnostic approach may differ, accordingly to the condition, suspicious causes, age groups and regions. Adrenaline is the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis, but not for acute urticaria, where H1-antihistamines are the first choice. In this paper, we review the main aspects, similarities and differences regarding definitions, mechanisms, causes, diagnosis and treatment of acute urticaria and anaphylaxis.

Wilderness Medical Society Clinical Practice Guidelines on Anaphylaxis

The Wilderness Medical Society convened a panel to review the literature and develop evidence-based clinical practice guidelines on the treatment of anaphylaxis, with an emphasis on a field-based perspective. The review also included literature regarding the definition, epidemiology, clinical manifestations, and prevention of anaphylaxis. The increasing prevalence of food allergies in the United States raises concern for a corresponding rise in the incidence of anaphylaxis. Intramuscular epinephrine is the primary treatment for anaphylaxis and should be administered before adjunctive treatments such as antihistamines, corticosteroids, and inhaled β agonists. For outdoor schools and organizations, selecting a method to administer epinephrine in the field is based on considerations of cost, safety, and first responder training, as well as federal guidelines and state-specific laws.

Management of Anaphylaxis

The key to managing anaphylaxis is early epinephrine administration. This can improve outcomes and prevent progression to severe and fatal anaphylaxis. Delayed or lack of administration of epinephrine is associated with fatal reactions. Positioning in a recumbent supine position, airway management, and intravenous fluids are essential in its management. Antihistamines and glucocorticosteroids should not be prescribed in place of epinephrine. β-adrenergic agonists by inhalation are indicated for bronchospasm associated with anaphylaxis despite optimal epinephrine treatment. Long-term management of anaphylaxis includes the identification and avoidance of triggers; identification of cofactors, such as mast cell disorders; patient, parent, and caregiver education, and interventions to reduce allergen sensitivity, such as the use of venom immunotherapy for Hymenoptera hypersensitivity. Long-term management is covered in other articles. Consultation with an allergist/immunologist is recommended when necessary.

Evidence update for the treatment of anaphylaxis

The Resuscitation Council UK has updated its Guideline for healthcare providers on the Emergency treatment of anaphylaxis. As part of this process, an evidence review was undertaken by the Guideline Working Group, using an internationally-accepted approach for adoption, adaptation, and de novo guideline development based on the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) evidence to decision (EtD) framework, referred to as GRADE-ADOLOPMENT. A number of significant changes have been made, which will be reflected in the updated Guideline. These include: emphasis on repeating intramuscular adrenaline doses after 5 min if symptoms of anaphylaxis do not resolve; corticosteroids (e.g. hydrocortisone) no longer being routinely recommended for the emergency treatment of anaphylaxis; interventions for reactions which are refractory to initial treatment with adrenaline; a recommendation against the use of antihistamines for the acute management of anaphylaxis; and guidance relating to the duration of observation following anaphylaxis, and timing of discharge.

World allergy organization anaphylaxis guidance 2020

Anaphylaxis is the most severe clinical presentation of acute systemic allergic reactions. The occurrence of anaphylaxis has increased in recent years, and subsequently, there is a need to continue disseminating knowledge on the diagnosis and management, so every healthcare professional is prepared to deal with such emergencies. The rationale of this updated position document is the need to keep guidance aligned with the current state of the art of knowledge in anaphylaxis management. The World Allergy Organization (WAO) anaphylaxis guidelines were published in 2011, and the current guidance adopts their major indications, incorporating some novel changes. Intramuscular epinephrine (adrenaline) continues to be the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis. Nevertheless, its use remains suboptimal. After an anaphylaxis occurrence, patients should be referred to a specialist to assess the potential cause and to be educated on prevention of recurrences and self-management. The limited availability of epinephrine auto-injectors remains a major problem in many countries, as well as their affordability for some patients.

H1-antihistamines Reduce Progression to Anaphylaxis Among Emergency Department Patients With Allergic Reactions

OBJECTIVES

H1-antihistamines (H1a) can be used to treat emergency department (ED) patients with allergic reactions; however, this is inconsistently done, likely because there is no evidence that this therapy has an impact on serious outcomes. Among ED patients initially presenting with allergic reactions, we investigated whether H1a were associated with lower rates of progression to anaphylaxis.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study conducted at two urban Canadian EDs from April 1, 2007, to March 31, 2012. We included consecutive adult patients with allergic reactions while excluding those presenting with anaphylaxis, according to prespecified criteria. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who subsequently developed anaphylaxis during medical care, either by emergency medical services (EMS) or in the ED. A prespecified subgroup analysis excluded patients who received H1a prior to EMS or ED contact. We compared those who received H1a and those who did not and used multivariable regression and propensity score adjustment techniques to compare outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 2,376 overall patients included, 1,880 (79.1%) were managed with H1a. Of the latter group, 36 of 1,880 (1.9%) developed anaphylaxis, compared to 17 of 496 (3.4%) in the non-H1a-treated group (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 0.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.17-0.70; number needed to treat [NNT] to benefit = 44.74, 95% CI = 35.36-99.67). In the subgroup analysis of 1,717 patients who did not receive H1a prior to EMS or ED contact, a similar association was observed (AOR = 0.26, 95% CI = 0.10-0.50; NNT to benefit 38.20, 95% CI = 32.58-55.24).

CONCLUSIONS

Among ED patient with allergic reactions, H1a administration was associated with a lower likelihood of progression to anaphylaxis. These data indicate that early H1a treatment in the ED or prehospital setting may decrease progression to anaphylaxis.

Australian and New Zealand Anaesthetic Allergy Group/ Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists Perioperative Anaphylaxis Management Guidelines

Anaphylaxis is an uncommon but important cause of serious morbidity and even mortality in the perioperative period. The Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA) with the Australian and New Zealand Anaesthetic Allergy Group (ANZAAG) have developed clinical management guidelines that include six crisis management cards. The content of the guidelines and cards is based on published literature and other international guidelines for the management of anaesthesia-related and non–anaesthesia-related anaphylaxis. The evidence is summarised in the associated background paper (Perioperative Anaphylaxis Management Guidelines [2016] www.anzca.edu.au/resources/endorsed-guidelines and www.anzaag.com/Mgmt%20Resources.aspx ). These guidelines are intended to apply to anaphylaxis occurring only during the perioperative period. They are not intended to apply to anaphylaxis outside the setting of dedicated monitoring and management by an anaesthetist. In this paper guidelines will be presented along with a brief background to their development.

The pharmacokinetics of DPH after the administration of a single intravenous or intramuscular dose in healthy dogs

The objective of this study was to determine the pharmacokinetics of diphenhydramine (DPH) in healthy dogs following a single i.v. or i.m. dose. Dogs were randomly allocated in two treatment groups and received DPH at 1 mg/kg, i.v., or 2 mg/kg, i.m. Blood samples were collected serially over 24 h. Plasma concentrations of DPH were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography, and noncompartmental pharmacokinetic analysis was performed with the commercially available software. Cardio-respiratory parameters, rectal temperature and effects on behaviour, such as sedation or excitement, were recorded. Diphenhydramine Clarea , Vdarea and T1/2 were 20.7 ± 2.9 mL/kg/min, 7.6 ± 0.7 L/kg and 4.2 ± 0.5 h for the i.v. route, respectively, and Clarea /F, Vdarea /F and T1/2 20.8 ± 2.7 mL/kg/min, 12.3 ± 1.2 L/kg and 6.8 ± 0.7 h for the i.m. route, respectively. Bioavailability was 88% after i.m. administration. No significant differences were found in physiological parameters between groups or within dogs of the same group, and values remained within normal limits. No adverse effects or changes in mental status were observed after the administration of DPH. Both routes of administration resulted in DPH plasma concentrations which exceeded levels considered therapeutic in humans.

Immediate-type hypersensitivity drug reactions

Hypersensitivity reactions including anaphylaxis have been reported for nearly all classes of therapeutic reagents and these reactions can occur within minutes to hours of exposure. These reactions are unpredictable, not directly related to dose or the pharmacological action of the drug and have a relatively high mortality risk. This review will focus on the clinical presentation, immune mechanisms, diagnosis and prevention of the most serious form of immediate onset drug hypersensitivity reaction, anaphylaxis. The incidence of drug-induced anaphylaxis deaths appears to be increasing and our understanding of the multiple and complex reasons for the unpredictable nature of anaphylaxis to drugs is also expanding. This review highlights the importance of enhancing our understanding of the biology of the patient (i.e. immune response, genetics) as well as the pharmacology and chemistry of the drug when investigating, diagnosing and treating drug hypersensitivity. Misdiagnosis of drug hypersensitivity leads to substantial patient risk and cost. Although oral provocation is often considered the gold standard of diagnosis, it can pose a potential risk to the patient. There is an urgent need to improve and standardize diagnostic testing and desensitization protocols as other diagnostic tests currently available for assessment of immediate drug allergy are not highly predictive.

Anaphylaxis: guidelines from the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology

Anaphylaxis is a clinical emergency, and all healthcare professionals should be familiar with its recognition and acute and ongoing management. These guidelines have been prepared by the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (EAACI) Taskforce on Anaphylaxis. They aim to provide evidence-based recommendations for the recognition, risk factor assessment, and the management of patients who are at risk of, are experiencing, or have experienced anaphylaxis. While the primary audience is allergists, these guidelines are also relevant to all other healthcare professionals. The development of these guidelines has been underpinned by two systematic reviews of the literature, both on the epidemiology and on clinical management of anaphylaxis. Anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening condition whose clinical diagnosis is based on recognition of a constellation of presenting features. First-line treatment for anaphylaxis is intramuscular adrenaline. Useful second-line interventions may include removing the trigger where possible, calling for help, correct positioning of the patient, high-flow oxygen, intravenous fluids, inhaled short-acting bronchodilators, and nebulized adrenaline. Discharge arrangements should involve an assessment of the risk of further reactions, a management plan with an anaphylaxis emergency action plan, and, where appropriate, prescribing an adrenaline auto-injector. If an adrenaline auto-injector is prescribed, education on when and how to use the device should be provided. Specialist follow-up is essential to investigate possible triggers, to perform a comprehensive risk assessment, and to prevent future episodes by developing personalized risk reduction strategies including, where possible, commencing allergen immunotherapy. Training for the patient and all caregivers is essential. There are still many gaps in the evidence base for anaphylaxis.

International consensus on (ICON) anaphylaxis

ICON: Anaphylaxis provides a unique perspective on the principal evidence-based anaphylaxis guidelines developed and published independently from 2010 through 2014 by four allergy/immunology organizations. These guidelines concur with regard to the clinical features that indicate a likely diagnosis of anaphylaxis -- a life-threatening generalized or systemic allergic or hypersensitivity reaction. They also concur about prompt initial treatment with intramuscular injection of epinephrine (adrenaline) in the mid-outer thigh, positioning the patient supine (semi-reclining if dyspneic or vomiting), calling for help, and when indicated, providing supplemental oxygen, intravenous fluid resuscitation and cardiopulmonary resuscitation, along with concomitant monitoring of vital signs and oxygenation. Additionally, they concur that H1-antihistamines, H2-antihistamines, and glucocorticoids are not initial medications of choice. For self-management of patients at risk of anaphylaxis in community settings, they recommend carrying epinephrine auto-injectors and personalized emergency action plans, as well as follow-up with a physician (ideally an allergy/immunology specialist) to help prevent anaphylaxis recurrences. ICON: Anaphylaxis describes unmet needs in anaphylaxis, noting that although epinephrine in 1 mg/mL ampules is available worldwide, other essentials, including supplemental oxygen, intravenous fluid resuscitation, and epinephrine auto-injectors are not universally available. ICON: Anaphylaxis proposes a comprehensive international research agenda that calls for additional prospective studies of anaphylaxis epidemiology, patient risk factors and co-factors, triggers, clinical criteria for diagnosis, randomized controlled trials of therapeutic interventions, and measures to prevent anaphylaxis recurrences. It also calls for facilitation of global collaborations in anaphylaxis research. IN ADDITION TO CONFIRMING THE ALIGNMENT OF MAJOR ANAPHYLAXIS GUIDELINES, ICON: Anaphylaxis adds value by including summary tables and citing 130 key references. It is published as an information resource about anaphylaxis for worldwide use by healthcare professionals, academics, policy-makers, patients, caregivers, and the public.

World Allergy Organization Anaphylaxis Guidelines: 2013 update of the evidence base

The World Allergy Organization (WAO) Guidelines for the assessment and management of anaphylaxis are a widely disseminated and used resource for information about anaphylaxis. They focus on patients at risk, triggers, clinical diagnosis, treatment in health care settings, self-treatment in the community, and prevention of recurrences. Their unique strengths include a global perspective informed by prior research on the global availability of essentials for anaphylaxis assessment and management and a global agenda for anaphylaxis research. Additionally, detailed colored illustrations are linked to key concepts in the text [Simons et al.: J Allergy Clin Immunol 2011;127:593.e1-e22]. The recommendations in the original WAO Anaphylaxis Guidelines for management of anaphylaxis in health care settings and community settings were based on evidence published in peer-reviewed, indexed medical journals to the end of 2010. These recommendations remain unchanged and clinically relevant. An update of the evidence base was published in 2012 [Simons et al.: Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2012;12:389-399]. In 2012 and early 2013, major advances were reported in the following areas: further characterization of patient phenotypes; development of in vitro tests (for some allergens) that help distinguish clinical risk of anaphylaxis from asymptomatic sensitization; epinephrine (adrenaline) research, including studies of a new epinephrine auto-injector for use in community settings, and randomized controlled trials of immunotherapy to prevent food-induced anaphylaxis. Despite these advances, the need for additional prospective studies, including randomized controlled trials of interventions in anaphylaxis is increasingly apparent. This 2013 Update highlights publications from 2012 and 2013 that further contribute to the evidence base for the recommendations made in the original WAO Anaphylaxis Guidelines. Ideally, it should be used in conjunction with these Guidelines and with the 2012 Guidelines Update.