Alfaxalone provides reliable sedation for intradermal allergen testing in dogs and does not significantly affect results when compared to dexmedetomidine

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine (Dexmedetomidine hydrochloride-Dexdomitor; Zoetis) is the preferred sedative used for canine intradermal allergen testing (IDT) in the United States. Alfaxalone (Alfaxan Multidose; Jurox Animal Health) is a neuroactive steroid, and its effect on sedation and allergen reactivity scores is unknown.

HYPOTHESIS/OBJECTIVES

We hypothesised that alfaxalone would produce an adequate level of sedation with fewer cardiovascular adverse effects and would not affect allergen reactivity scores or histamine wheal size compared to dexmedetomidine.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty client-owned dogs were included in two groups: 10 atopic and 10 nonatopic. In a randomised, controlled, blinded, cross-over design all dogs underwent two modified IDT, 1-4 weeks apart, using intravenous dexmedetomidine (2.87-5.22 μg/kg) or alfaxalone (1.8-2.4 mg/kg). Anaesthetic parameters and sedation level were recorded over 25 min using a validated canine sedation scale described by Grint et al. (Small Anim Pract, 2009, 50, 62). Simultaneously, both objective and subjective reactivity scores were measured in technical triplicates at 10, 15 and 20 min. The modified IDT included eight allergens, histamine-positive and saline-negative controls.

RESULTS

Alfaxalone produced a significantly higher sedation score across all time points (p < 0.05). All objective scores were significantly correlated to the corresponding subjective scores (Spearman R = 0.859, p < 0.0001). Sedative used did not significantly affect subjective allergen scores for nine atopic dogs (p > 0.05, 15 min). Sedative used did not affect the diameter of objective scores for individual allergens and histamine wheals (p > 0.05, 15 min).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Intravascular alfaxalone is an alternative sedative for IDT in dogs. Alfaxalone may be preferred to dexmedetomidine in some clinical scenarios as a result of having fewer cardiovascular adverse effects.

Skin tests for the exploration of hypersensitivity reactions associated with iodinated contrast media

BACKGROUND

Iodinated contrast media (ICM) are responsible for multiple side effects, especially hypersensitivity reactions. These reactions can either be authentic allergies, or non-allergic hypersensitivity reactions. Skin tests (prick and intradermal tests) are simple to perform and can be of great help, especially if the ICM need to be re-used. The aim of the study was to assess the characteristics of the patients in whom skin tests were performed, and the results of these tests.

METHODS

This is a retrospective study from June 2014 to June 2019. All included patients had at least one episode of hypersensitivity reaction to ICM and underwent skin tests.

RESULTS

We included 35 patients aged 18 to 85 years. The iopromide was the most implicated ICM. The reactions were mainly cutaneous (n=30) and immediate (n=27). The skin tests were negative, except for two patients. The reuse of ICM occured in 11 patients: 9 with an ICM other than the one suspected and two patients with the same ICM. Among these patients, 5 did not have any premedication. Two of them had a second hypersensitivity reaction, the first with another ICM and the second with the same ICM.

CONCLUSION

One of the main pillars of allergic exploration is ICM skin testing, not only to prevent recurrence, but also to allow patients to benefit from ICM reuse, which are sometimes essential.

Effect of the Inoculation Site of Bovine and Avian Purified Protein Derivatives (PPDs) on the Performance of the Intradermal Tuberculin Test in Goats From Tuberculosis-Free and Infected Herds

The single and comparative intradermal tuberculin (SIT and CIT) tests are used for the ante-mortem diagnosis of caprine tuberculosis (TB). The tuberculin injection site has been associated with a different performance of the test in cattle. In contrast to that required in cattle in Europe (cervical injection), it can be carried out in the scapular region in goats. Nevertheless, there are no previous data concerning the effect of the injection site on the performance of the test in goats. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the effect of two different inoculation sites (cervical and scapular) on the performance of the SIT/CIT tests. This was done by intradermally inoculating 309 goats from two infected herds and one TB-free herd with both avian and bovine PPDs in the mid-cervical and scapular regions. None of the animals from the TB-free herd had positive reactions, and the number of reactors was not significantly higher, regardless of the inoculation site, in the high and low prevalence herds. However, significantly higher increases in skin fold thickness were observed on the cervical site when compared to the scapular site after the avian and bovine PPD inoculations in the TB-free herd (p < 0.001) and after the bovine PPD injection in the high prevalence herd (p = 0.003). The presence of clinical signs was also more evident on the cervical site when using avian and bovine PPDs in the high prevalence herd (p < 0.01). In contrast, increases in higher skin fold thickness were observed on the scapular site when compared to the cervical site after the bovine and avian PPD inoculations were employed in the low prevalence herd (p < 0.01). These results suggest that the cervical injection of PPDs may improve the sensitivity of the intradermal tuberculin test in high TB prevalence caprine herds, mainly owing to the increased presence of local clinical signs and a better performance of the CIT test. Moreover, specificity was not affected when using standard interpretations, although further analyses in a great number of herds are required in order to confirm these findings.

Paracetamol Allergy: A Case of a 9-Year-Old Female with a History of Atopy

Background: We describe a rare case involving paracetamol, a commonly used drug worldwide. Increased paracetamol consumption increases the risk of adverse drug reactions. Case Presentation: This is a case of a 9-year-old girl who visited the emergency department due to sudden onset sneezing, nasal itching, urticaria, and angioedema after paracetamol ingestion. The diagnostic and etiologic studies revealed an immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated hypersensitivity mechanism to paracetamol. Conclusion: Few cases of this phenomenon have been reported in previous literature. As confirmed in this study, a negative skin prick test did not exclude hypersensitivity, and conducting intradermal tests (IDTs) increased diagnostic accuracy. The patient had a positive IDT, confirming the underlying IgE-mediated reaction. The follow-up of a confirmed paracetamol hypersensitivity implies patient education about avoidance of any paracetamol-containing formulation, including combination products and clarification of available alternative drugs. This is likely the first publication documenting IgE-mediated paracetamol allergy in pediatric patients. We intend to underline the clinical benefits of diagnostic confirmation toward suspected drug hypersensitivity reactions in children, a particularly useful topic for pediatricians and pediatric allergists.

Identification of Risk Factors and Cross-Reactivity of Local Anesthetics Hypersensitivity: Analysis of 14-Years' Experience

Purpose

Local anesthetics (LA) are widely used and adverse drug reactions (ADR) occur in 2.5–10%, but hypersensitivity reactions are rare (ranging between 0% and 4.3%). Risk is so overestimated causing too many allergy clinic referrals. There are limited and also conflicting results over the management of LA allergy. We aimed to find out who should be referred to an allergy clinic for a LA allergy testing, to define the subjects with an increased risk of LA allergy and to assess the need for testing for identifying alternative LA.

Patients and Methods

We performed a retrospective study of patients referred to our clinic for diagnostic workup of LA hypersensitivity from 2006 to 2020.

Results

In our cohort of 398 patients, tests were positive in 14 (3.52%) of them. Personal history of ADR with LA was the only independent risk factor for positive test (RR=4.007, p=0.033). Presence of generalized cutaneous symptoms and hypotension during past reaction were independent predictors of positive test (RR=9.043, p=0.021 and RR=10.445, p=0.038, respectively). The negative predictive value of intradermal test at dilution of 1:100 for immediate-type reaction was high (97.56%). Also, we demonstrated cross-reactivity within the amide-group LAs and co-occurrence of immediate- and delayed-type reactions.

Conclusion

Only patients with an LA-induced ADR should be referred to an allergy clinic. History of generalized cutaneous symptoms and/or hypotension during the reaction may define subjects with an increased risk of LA allergy. A stepwise test procedure may start with skin tests especially for these patients with increased risk factors. In presence of LA allergy, alternative LA should always be confirmed by performing a challenge test.

Intradermal Testing With Radiocontrast Media to Prevent Recurrent Adverse Reactions

OBJECTIVE. Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to radiocontrast media are a significant social and economic burden and are difficult to predict. Because some ADRs to radiocontrast media may be immunologically induced, a skin test with diluted 1:10 radiocontrast media has been used to predict ADRs. However, using this test in clinical practice is difficult because of its low sensitivity. SUBJECTS AND METHODS. This study enrolled 36 patients with a history of immediate ADR to radiocontrast media who visited the Allergy and Asthma Clinic of Severance Hospital from 2017 to 2018. Patients underwent intradermal testing (IDT) with five types of diluted (1:10) and undiluted radiocontrast media (iohexol, iobitridol, iopamidol, iopromide, and iodixanol). The IDT result was regarded as positive if at least one radiocontrast medium elicited a positive reaction. Positivity of IDT and sensitivity to the culprit radiocontrast medium were calculated and compared. For subsequent CT examinations with a radiocontrast medium, the contrast agent eliciting a negative skin reaction in IDT was selected, excluding the previous culprit radiocontrast medium. RESULTS. IDT positivity and sensitivity for the culprit radiocontrast medium at 1:10 dilution were 47.2% and 47.2%, respectively, whereas the positivity and sensitivity for the undiluted radiocontrast medium were 86.1% and 75.0%, respectively. The positivity and sensitivity were higher with frequent radiocontrast medium use or with severe reaction. Of 22 patients who underwent another CT examination with the contrast medium selected on the basis of IDT results, 21 (95.5%) did not experience an ADR. CONCLUSION. IDT to prevent ADR should be performed with undiluted radiocontrast medium. Selecting an alternative radiocontrast agent on the basis of IDT results can be clinically useful to prevent recurrent ADRs to radiocontrast media.

Incidence of cephalosporin-induced anaphylaxis and clinical efficacy of screening intradermal tests with cephalosporins: A large multicenter retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Few studies have investigated the incidence of anaphylaxis induced by individual or structurally similar cephalosporins. The aims of the study were to assess the incidence of cephalosporin-induced anaphylaxis and evaluate the clinical efficacy of screening skin tests.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, we obtained information on total cephalosporin use and cephalosporin-induced anaphylaxis in intravenous cephalosporin recipients in 12 general hospitals between 2013 and 2015. Cephalosporins were divided into 4 groups according to similar side-chain structures. The incidence of cephalosporin-induced anaphylaxis was assessed for each cephalosporin, cephalosporin generation, and side-chain group. To verify the efficacy of screening intradermal tests (IDT) with cephalosporin, the 12 hospitals were assigned to the intervention or control group depending on whether they performed screening IDT before the administration of cephalosporins.

RESULTS

We identified 76 cases of cephalosporin-induced anaphylaxis with 1 123 345 exposures to intravenous cephalosporins (6.8 per 100 000 exposures), and the incidence of fatal anaphylaxis by cephalosporin was 0.1 cases per 100 000 exposures. The highest incidences of anaphylaxis occurred in the ceftizoxime (13.0 cases per 100 000 exposures) and side-chain group 1 (cefepime, cefotaxime, ceftizoxime, ceftriaxone, and cefuroxime; 9.3 per 100 000). There was no case of anaphylaxis induced by cefoxitin, cefmetazole, cefminox, and cefotiam. The clinical effectiveness of routine screening IDT was not significant (P = .06).

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of cephalosporin-induced anaphylaxis differed according to individual drugs and side-chain structure. Screening IDT showed no clinical efficacy at a population level.

Non-immediate-reading skin tests and prolonged challenges in non-immediate hypersensitivity to beta-lactams in children

BACKGROUND

A minority of children reporting non-immediate reactions to beta-lactams (BLs) are allergic. Allergy workup usually includes late-reading (48-72 hours) skin tests (ST) and short (1-3 days) drug provocation tests (DPT), regardless of the chronology of the index reaction. The sensitivity of hyper-late-reading (≥6-7 days) ST and of prolonged DPT for the diagnosis of non-immediate hypersensitivity to BLs is yet to be determined.

OBJECTIVES

To establish the diagnostic values of late-reading ST and hyper-late-reading ST and of prolonged DPT in children reporting non-immediate reactions to BLs.

METHODS

Prospective assessment of children reporting non-immediate reactions to BLs with late- and additional hyper-late-reading intradermal (ID) and patch tests, and if negative, with prolonged DPT.

RESULTS

Five hundred and fifty children reporting reactions to a single or several BLs (674 suspected BLs) were included. Non-immediate hypersensitivity to BLs was diagnosed in 63 children (11.5%), reporting 66 reactions (9.8%), based on responses in ST (n = 17, 25.8%: 5 to ID, 8 to patch tests, and 4 to both tests), DPT (n = 43, 65.2%), and clinical history (n = 6, 9.1%), including 3/9 children with severe cutaneous adverse reactions. Skin test positivity was observed after the 6-7th day in 14/17 children, and DPT positivity after a median time of 3 days. No severe reaction was observed after ST or during prolonged DPT.

CONCLUSION

Additional hyper-late-reading of ST enhanced their positivity. However, their overall sensitivity remained weak, especially in non-severe cases. Prolonged DPT are safe and may improve the performance of DPT in the diagnosis of non-immediate hypersensitivity to BLs.

Patients with breakthrough reactions to iodinated contrast media have low incidence of positive skin tests

BACKGROUND

The term "breakthrough reactions" designates repeated hypersensitivity reactions to iodinated contrast media (ICM) despite premedication with glucocorticoids and antihistamines. We aimed to retrospectively evaluate the rate of positive skin test (STs) in our cohort of patients with previous breakthrough reactions to different ICMs.

METHODS

A series of 35 patients, who experienced at least one breakthrough reaction to ICM and who underwent STs within 6 months from the reaction were studied, and results were compared to a control group of patients with a first hypersensitivity reaction occurred without premedication. Skin prick tests (SPT), intradermal tests (IDT) and patch tests (PT) at different dilutions, with a set of three to four ICM were performed.

RESULTS

Of the 35 patients with prior breakthrough reactions, 57% had an immediate reaction (IR) and 43% had a non-immediate reaction (NIR). Patients who experienced the first hypersensitivity IR or NIR, later had one or more breakthrough IR or NIR, respectively. Overall, 29% (10/35) of patients with prior breakthrough reactions resulted positive to STs compared to 57% (16/28) of the control group (p < 0.05). No significant difference in allergy history, age, sex, other clinical / demographic features nor chronic use of ACE-inhibitor, beta-blockers or NSAIDs was observed.

CONCLUSION

This preliminary finding suggests that patients with prior breakthrough reactions have significantly lower immunologically proven ICM reactions (positive STs) if compared to non-breakthrough patients. According to that, a considerable number of breakthrough reactions seems to be non-allergic hypersensitivity reactions or reactions which could be mostly prevented by a proper, well-timed skin testing. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm these results, with a more careful analysis of patients' risk factors, a laboratory assessment that includes an in vitro allergy diagnostics, and hopefully a drug provocation test for selected cases.

Intradermal Tests for Diagnosis of Drug Allergy are not Affected by a Topical Anesthetic Patch

The use of topical anesthesia to perform intradermal tests (IDTs) for drug allergy diagnosis was never investigated. We aimed to determine the effects of a topical anesthetic patch containing prilocaine-lidocaine on wheal size of IDT with drugs. Patients who had positive IDT as part of their investigation process of suspected drug hypersensitivity were selected. IDT were performed according to guidelines. Anesthetic patch (AP) was placed and the same prior positive IDT, as well as positive histamine skin prick test (SPT) and negative (saline IDT) controls, were performed in the anesthetized area. Patients with negative IDT were also included to check for false positives with AP. Increase in wheals after 20 minutes both with and without AP was recorded and compared. 45 IDT were performed (36 patients), of which 37 have been previously positive (14 antibiotics, 10 general anesthetics, 6 non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, 3 iodinated contrasts, 3 anti-Hi-histamines and 1 ranitidine). Mean histamine SPT size without the AP was 4.7 mm [95%CI (4.4-5.1]), and 4.6 mm [95%CI(4.2-5.0)] with anesthesia. Mean wheal increase in IDT for drugs without the anesthesia was 4.5 mm [95%CI(3.3-5.7)] and with anesthesia was 4.3 mm [95%CI(2.8-5.8)]. No statistical significant differences were observed between skin tests with or without AP for histamine SPT (P=0.089), IDT with saline (P=0.750), and IDT with drugs (P=0.995). None of the patients with negative IDT showed positivity with the AP, or vice-versa. The use of an AP containing prilocaine-lidocaine does not interfere with IDT to diagnose drug allergy, and no false positive tests were found.