Paranos S, Petrović S, Bojović I
Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Zvezdara University Medical Centre, Belgrade.
Srp Arh Celok Lek. 2000 May-Jun;128(5-6):194-9.
Skin prick-test has been accepted as one of diagnostic criteria for atopic diseases. In accordance with the recommendations of the EAACI (European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology), the Subcommittee for skin testing, allergen specific skin prick-test should be estimated in relation to positive control (histamine hydrochloride in the HEP system/histamine equivalent prick/) [1-4]. The purpose of this study was to establish a recording system of skin sensitivity to allergen by using HEP method in our patients.
The study was performed in 75 persons (49 females, 26 males, mean age 34.6 years) suffering from atopic diseases (hay fever, allergic asthma or rhinoconjunctivitis) and susceptible to one of pollen allergens. Skin prick tests were performed and recorded as said before [2-6]. We used a house standardized (Torlak Institute) allergen solution of 5000 AU/mL (pollen of Dactylis glomerata, Lolium perennae, Phleum pratense), 7500 AU/mL (Phleum pratense) and 10,000 AU/mL (Phleum pratense) and histamine-hydrochloride solution (1 mg/mL and 10 mg/mL). Total and allergen specific serum IgE was made before the study by ELISA immunoassay (Pharmacia, Uppsala, EIA RAST Phadesim) in all selected persons and results were recorded in Phadebas RAST unit given by the manufacturer. According to the serum concentration of specific IgE, patients were classified into groups (low susceptibility, intermediate sensitivity and highly susceptible persons). Skin reactions were recorded according to histamine skin sensitivity (as reaction equal or larger in diameter than histamine papule). Additionally, measured allergenic and histamine wheal were sorted and frequency of positive tests was calculated. Skin testing was performed with the approval of the Ethic Committee of our Centre and with the written patients' consent. For statistical analysis we used chi 2 test, regression analysis and Kolmogar-Smirnov nonparametric test. Results for the confidence of 95% (p < 0.05), were considered significant.
In a group of 30 persons, susceptible to Phleum pratense pollen (Table 1, Graph 1 and 2), it was found that the number of positive tests was equally distributed among groups; it was dependent on the allergen concentrations, and was higher when using H1 (p < 0.01). When H10 was used as reference solution, only allergens of the highest concentration provided a significant number of positive tests (p < 0.01). There was no difference among groups of patients depending on the concentration of used histamine solution. In all 75 persons, we estimated skin-prick test performed by allergen solution of 5000 AU/mL and compared it with HI reaction. It was calculated that the most frequent histamine papule diameter was 3 mm and this value was farther used as the end-diameter in HEP system. Patients were classified in groups on the basis of serum IgE concentrations (RAST). The estimation of criterion positivity revealed the highest significance by using criterion Ap > Hp (p < 0.001). At the same time, if the criterion Ap > 2Hp was used we were sure that 99% of our patients were highly sensitive to allergen we tested.
In the study it was established that allergen concentration of 5000 AU/mL and histamine solution of 1 mg/mL are sufficient to estimate skin-prick test in the HEP system. We found that the end diameter of histamine-papula was 3 mm. This finding suggests the good utility of HEP system. In addition, it has been proven that absolute value of papula diameter is not a critical parameter for the estimation of positivity or discrimation among patients regarding their susceptibility to allergen. By this system we found that criterion Ap > Hp, provides a significantly higher number of positive tests (p < 0.001). The recommended criterion Ap > Hp gives no discrimination among tested groups of patients, while using the criterion Ap > 2Hp we diagnosed highly susceptible persons (p < 0.01). (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED
皮肤点刺试验已被公认为特应性疾病的诊断标准之一。根据欧洲变态反应和临床免疫学会(EAACI)皮肤试验小组委员会的建议,应相对于阳性对照(HEP系统中的盐酸组胺/组胺等效点刺/)评估变应原特异性皮肤点刺试验[1-4]。本研究的目的是在我们的患者中建立一种使用HEP方法记录皮肤对变应原敏感性的系统。
该研究对75名(49名女性,26名男性,平均年龄34.6岁)患有特应性疾病(花粉症、过敏性哮喘或鼻结膜炎)且对一种花粉变应原敏感的患者进行。如前所述[2-6]进行皮肤点刺试验并记录。我们使用了Torlak研究所标准化的屋尘变应原溶液,浓度分别为5000 AU/mL(鸭茅、多年生黑麦草、早熟禾花粉)、7500 AU/mL(早熟禾)和10000 AU/mL(早熟禾)以及盐酸组胺溶液(1 mg/mL和10 mg/mL)。在研究前,通过ELISA免疫测定法(Pharmacia,乌普萨拉,EIA RAST Phadesim)对所有入选患者进行总IgE和变应原特异性血清IgE检测,并将结果记录为制造商提供的Phadebas RAST单位。根据特异性IgE的血清浓度,将患者分为不同组(低敏感性、中度敏感性和高敏感性人群)。根据组胺皮肤敏感性记录皮肤反应(直径等于或大于组胺丘疹的反应)。此外,对测量的变应原和风团以及组胺风团进行分类,并计算阳性试验的频率。皮肤试验在我们中心伦理委员会批准并获得患者书面同意的情况下进行。对于统计分析,我们使用卡方检验、回归分析和Kolmogorov-Smirnov非参数检验。95%置信度(p < 0.05)的结果被认为具有统计学意义。
在一组30名对早熟禾花粉敏感的患者中(表1、图1和2),发现阳性试验的数量在各组中分布均匀;它取决于变应原浓度,使用H1时更高(p < 0.01)。当使用H10作为参考溶液时,只有最高浓度的变应原产生了大量阳性试验(p < 0.01)。根据所用组胺溶液的浓度,患者组之间没有差异。在所有75名患者中,我们评估了用5000 AU/mL变应原溶液进行的皮肤点刺试验,并将其与HI反应进行比较。计算得出最常见的组胺丘疹直径为3 mm,该值进一步用作HEP系统中的终末直径。根据血清IgE浓度(RAST)将患者分组。通过使用标准Ap > Hp评估标准阳性率显示出最高的显著性(p < 0.001)。同时,如果使用标准Ap > 2Hp,我们确定99%的患者对我们测试的变应原高度敏感。
本研究确定5000 AU/mL的变应原浓度和1 mg/mL的组胺溶液足以在HEP系统中评估皮肤点刺试验。我们发现组胺丘疹的终末直径为3 mm。这一发现表明HEP系统具有良好的实用性。此外,已证明丘疹直径的绝对值对于评估阳性率或区分患者对变应原的易感性不是关键参数。通过该系统,我们发现标准Ap > Hp产生了显著更多的阳性试验(p < 0.001)。推荐的标准Ap > Hp在受试患者组之间没有区分作用,而使用标准Ap > 2Hp时我们诊断出高敏感性人群(p < 0.01)。(摘要截断)