Suppr超能文献

火蚁毒液在火蚁过敏诊断中的安全性和有效性。

Safety and efficacy of fire ant venom in the diagnosis of fire ant allergy.

作者信息

Stafford C T, Wise S L, Robinson D A, Crosby B L, Hoffman D R

机构信息

Medical College of Georgia, Augusta 30912.

出版信息

J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1992 Oct;90(4 Pt 1):653-61. doi: 10.1016/0091-6749(92)90139-s.

Abstract

Thirty-three adult patients who had had systemic allergic reactions to fire ant stings and 33 insect-nonallergic control subjects were skin tested with single lots of Solenopsis invicta (Sol i) fire ant venom (IFAV) and two commercially available imported fire ant whole body extracts (IFA WBEs). All three extracts were analyzed for protein concentration. Sol i II and Sol i III concentrations were each assayed by means of two ELISAs with complementary monoclonal antibodies, one species specific and one cross-reactive. Radioallergosorbent test (RAST) to IFAV and both IFA WBEs was performed on sera from all study subjects. Both IFA WBEs contained high concentrations of fire ant body proteins. Sol i II and III concentrations each varied twofold between the two IFA WBE preparations. Patients were generally more reactive to IFAV than IFA WBE by skin testing and RAST. IFAV RAST appeared to be a more sensitive assay than IFA WBE RAST. No adverse reactions occurred to skin testing with IFAV, but intradermal testing with higher concentrations of IFA WBE caused delayed large local reactions in 16 of 30 (53%) control subjects. These reactions were attributed to the large amounts of extraneous body proteins in IFA WBE. These results (1) demonstrate that skin testing with IFAV is safe, (2) indicate that IFAV is more potent than IFA WBE, and (3) suggest that IFAV may be the superior reagent for diagnosis of fire ant allergy.

摘要

33名曾对火蚁叮咬产生全身过敏反应的成年患者和33名无昆虫过敏的对照受试者,用单批入侵红火蚁(Sol i)火蚁毒液(IFAV)以及两种市售进口火蚁全虫提取物(IFA WBEs)进行皮肤试验。对所有三种提取物都进行了蛋白质浓度分析。Sol i II和Sol i III的浓度分别通过两种使用互补单克隆抗体的酶联免疫吸附测定(ELISA)进行检测,一种是种属特异性的,另一种是交叉反应性的。对所有研究对象的血清进行了针对IFAV和两种IFA WBEs的放射变应原吸附试验(RAST)。两种IFA WBEs都含有高浓度的火蚁身体蛋白。在两种IFA WBE制剂中,Sol i II和III的浓度各自相差两倍。通过皮肤试验和RAST,患者对IFAV的反应通常比对IFA WBEs更强烈。IFAV RAST似乎是比IFA WBE RAST更敏感的检测方法。用IFAV进行皮肤试验未出现不良反应,但用较高浓度的IFA WBE进行皮内试验在30名对照受试者中的16名(53%)引起了延迟性的大局部反应。这些反应归因于IFA WBE中大量的外来身体蛋白。这些结果(1)表明用IFAV进行皮肤试验是安全的,(2)表明IFAV比IFA WBE更有效,(3)提示IFAV可能是诊断火蚁过敏的更佳试剂。

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