Suppr超能文献

对患有口腔过敏综合征的草和桦树过敏患者的诊断评估。

Diagnostic evaluation of grass- and birch-allergic patients with oral allergy syndrome.

作者信息

Anhoej C, Backer V, Nolte H

机构信息

Department of Internal Medicine, Allergy and Asthma Unit, Bispebjerg University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark.

出版信息

Allergy. 2001 Jun;56(6):548-52. doi: 10.1034/j.1398-9995.2001.056006548.x.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patients with birch and grass allergy often suffer from oral allergy symptoms when ingesting cross-reacting fresh fruits and vegetables. However, fruit and vegetable allergen extracts are often readily degradable or contain clinically irrelevant cross-reacting epitopes, resulting in diagnostic discrepancies when fruit and vegetable allergic reactions are evaluated. The risk of using nonstandardized fresh food extracts for skin testing may also be of concern. The objective was to compare and evaluate the clinical utility of selected recombinant grass and birch cross-reacting food allergens with fresh and commercial melon, hazelnut, and apple extracts.

METHODS

Thirty-six grass- and or birch-allergic patients and 17 control subjects consented to participate in the study. All subjects were skin prick tested and had basophil histamine-release tests done with fresh fruits and various extracts of hazelnut, apple, and melon. The diagnosis of oral allergy syndrome was confirmed by oral challenges. In addition, histamine release to recombinant Bet v 1 and Bet v 2, and recombinant Phl p 1 and Phl p 2, Phl p 5 was performed.

RESULTS

The skin prick test with fresh hazelnut, apple, and melon showed sensitivities of 0.97, 0.92, and 0.89, respectively. The corresponding specificities were 0.78, 0.72, and 0.82, respectively. In contrast, the histamine-release test with hazelnut, apple, and melon gave sensitivities of 0.87, 0.71, and 1.00, respectively. The corresponding specificities were 0.65, 0.93, and 0.43. The skin prick test showed excellent negative predictive value (> 90%). No added value of recombinant allergen testing was noted. Oral challenge did not result in severe systemic reactions, and no systemic reactions were observed with skin prick tests with fresh fruits.

CONCLUSION

The skin prick test showed an almost optimal diagnostic value with a satisfactory sensitivity (> 89%) and excellent negative predictive value with fresh fruits. When the skin prick test with fresh nut and apple cannot be performed, histamine release is a diagnostic alternative. Histamine release with melon showed lack of specificity. This was probably due to extensive IgE cross-reactivity with pollen, since these patients also responded to recombinant Phl p 1 and Bet v 1. Skin testing and challenges with fresh fruits were safe.

摘要

背景

桦树和草过敏患者在摄入交叉反应性新鲜水果和蔬菜时,常出现口腔过敏症状。然而,水果和蔬菜过敏原提取物往往易于降解,或含有临床上不相关的交叉反应表位,导致评估水果和蔬菜过敏反应时出现诊断差异。使用非标准化新鲜食物提取物进行皮肤试验的风险也可能令人担忧。目的是比较和评估选定的重组草和桦树交叉反应性食物过敏原与新鲜及市售甜瓜、榛子和苹果提取物的临床实用性。

方法

36名对草和/或桦树过敏的患者以及17名对照受试者同意参与该研究。所有受试者均接受皮肤点刺试验,并用新鲜水果以及榛子、苹果和甜瓜的各种提取物进行嗜碱性粒细胞组胺释放试验。通过口服激发试验确诊口腔过敏综合征。此外,还进行了对重组Bet v 1和Bet v 2以及重组Phl p 1、Phl p 2、Phl p 5的组胺释放试验。

结果

用新鲜榛子、苹果和甜瓜进行皮肤点刺试验的敏感性分别为0.97、0.92和0.89。相应的特异性分别为0.78、0.72和0.82。相比之下,用榛子、苹果和甜瓜进行组胺释放试验的敏感性分别为0.87、0.71和1.00。相应的特异性分别为0.65、0.93和0.43。皮肤点刺试验显示出极好的阴性预测值(>90%)。未发现重组过敏原检测有额外价值。口服激发试验未导致严重的全身反应,用新鲜水果进行皮肤点刺试验时也未观察到全身反应。

结论

皮肤点刺试验对新鲜水果显示出几乎最佳的诊断价值,敏感性令人满意(>89%)且阴性预测值极好。当无法用新鲜坚果和苹果进行皮肤点刺试验时,组胺释放试验是一种诊断选择。甜瓜的组胺释放试验显示缺乏特异性。这可能是由于与花粉存在广泛的IgE交叉反应,因为这些患者对重组Phl p 1和Bet v 1也有反应。用新鲜水果进行皮肤试验和激发试验是安全的。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验