• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

皮肤试验与免疫捕获系统在霉菌过敏评估中的比较。

Comparison of the skin test and ImmunoCAP system in the evaluation of mold allergy.

作者信息

Liang Kai-Li, Su Mao-Chang, Jiang Rong-San

机构信息

Department of Otolaryngology, Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan, ROC.

出版信息

J Chin Med Assoc. 2006 Jan;69(1):3-6. doi: 10.1016/S1726-4901(09)70103-0.

DOI:10.1016/S1726-4901(09)70103-0
PMID:16447919
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Mold is ubiquitous in our environment and is a common allergen in allergic diseases. The skin test and the Pharmacia ImmunoCAP system (CAP) for assay-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies are both widely used. The goal of this study was to compare the performance of the skin test and CAP in the evaluation of mold allergy.

METHODS

Patients with allergic rhinitis were enrolled at our outpatient department. The diagnosis of allergic rhinitis was based on typical symptoms for more than 2 years. All patients were tested by both intradermal skin test and serum assay for specific IgE antibodies. The skin test included house dust, cotton, ragweed, and 5 fungal antigens (Candida, Alternaria, Aspergillus, Cladosporium, and Penicillium). The serum-specific IgE antibodies were quantified using the radioimmunoassay version of CAP.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients (44 males and 31 females) with allergic rhinitis were enrolled in this study. Their ages ranged from 12 to 76 years old, with a mean of 31.9 years. The positive rates of skin test and CAP were 56.0% versus 9.3% for Candida, 22.7% versus 1.3% for Alternaria, 16% versus 9.3% for Aspergillus, 14.7% versus 1.3% for Cladosporium, and 32% versus 8% for Penicillium. There were statistically significant differences between the positive rates for Candida, Alternaria, Cladosporium, and Penicillium when analyzed by the McNemar test.

CONCLUSION

The positive rate of the skin test is higher than CAP when evaluating mold allergy. Clinicians should note that a discrepancy may exist between the results of in vitro and in vivo tests when evaluating mold allergy.

摘要

背景

霉菌在我们的环境中无处不在,是过敏性疾病中常见的变应原。皮肤试验和用于检测特异性免疫球蛋白E(IgE)抗体的法玛西亚免疫捕获系统(CAP)都被广泛使用。本研究的目的是比较皮肤试验和CAP在评估霉菌过敏方面的性能。

方法

在我们的门诊部招募过敏性鼻炎患者。过敏性鼻炎的诊断基于2年以上的典型症状。所有患者均接受皮内皮肤试验和血清特异性IgE抗体检测。皮肤试验包括屋尘、棉花、豚草和5种真菌抗原(白色念珠菌、链格孢属、曲霉属、枝孢属和青霉属)。使用CAP的放射免疫分析版本对血清特异性IgE抗体进行定量。

结果

本研究共纳入75例过敏性鼻炎患者(44例男性和31例女性)。他们的年龄在12至76岁之间,平均年龄为31.9岁。白色念珠菌皮肤试验和CAP的阳性率分别为56.0%和9.3%,链格孢属分别为22.7%和1.3%,曲霉属分别为16%和9.3%,枝孢属分别为14.7%和1.3%,青霉属分别为32%和8%。通过McNemar检验分析,白色念珠菌、链格孢属、枝孢属和青霉属的阳性率之间存在统计学显著差异。

结论

在评估霉菌过敏时,皮肤试验的阳性率高于CAP。临床医生应注意,在评估霉菌过敏时,体外和体内试验结果可能存在差异。

相似文献

1
Comparison of the skin test and ImmunoCAP system in the evaluation of mold allergy.皮肤试验与免疫捕获系统在霉菌过敏评估中的比较。
J Chin Med Assoc. 2006 Jan;69(1):3-6. doi: 10.1016/S1726-4901(09)70103-0.
2
[Investigation of mold fungi in air samples of elementary schools and evaluation of allergen-specific IgE levels in students' sera].[小学空气样本中霉菌真菌的调查及学生血清中过敏原特异性IgE水平的评估]
Mikrobiyol Bul. 2012 Apr;46(2):266-75.
3
Prevalence of mold-specific immunoglobulins in a Midwestern allergy practice.中西部过敏诊所中霉菌特异性免疫球蛋白的患病率。
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 1997 Nov;117(5):516-20. doi: 10.1016/S0194-59989770024-X.
4
[Correlation between positive skin tests to molds, total IgE, and specific IgE using ELISA and mold cultures from the environment of the pediatric allergy patient].[儿科过敏患者环境中霉菌皮肤试验阳性、总IgE以及使用酶联免疫吸附测定法检测的特异性IgE与霉菌培养物之间的相关性]
Rev Alerg Mex. 2001 Sep-Oct;48(5):137-40.
5
Sensitization to fungi: epidemiology, comparative skin tests, and IgE reactivity of fungal extracts.对真菌的致敏作用:真菌提取物的流行病学、皮肤试验比较及IgE反应性
Clin Exp Allergy. 2003 Oct;33(10):1429-38. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2222.2003.01783.x.
6
In vitro diagnostic evaluation of patients with inhalant allergies: summary of probability outcomes comparing results of CLA- and CAP-specific immunoglobulin E test systems.吸入性过敏患者的体外诊断评估:比较CLA和CAP特异性免疫球蛋白E检测系统结果的概率结果总结。
Allergy Asthma Proc. 2003 Jul-Aug;24(4):253-8.
7
How to diagnose mould allergy? Comparison of skin prick tests with specific IgE results.如何诊断霉菌过敏?皮肤点刺试验与特异性IgE结果的比较。
Clin Exp Allergy. 2016 Jul;46(7):981-91. doi: 10.1111/cea.12733. Epub 2016 May 3.
8
Clinical Evaluation and Management of Patients with Suspected Fungus Sensitivity.疑似真菌敏感性患者的临床评估和管理。
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2016 May-Jun;4(3):405-14. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2015.10.015. Epub 2016 Jan 2.
9
Can mold allergy be diagnosed with a skin test or specific IgE antibodies?
J Chin Med Assoc. 2006 Jan;69(1):1-2. doi: 10.1016/S1726-4901(09)70102-9.
10
The importance of mold sensitivity in nonallergic rhinitis patients.霉菌敏感性在非过敏性鼻炎患者中的重要性。
Int Forum Allergy Rhinol. 2016 Jul;6(7):716-21. doi: 10.1002/alr.21731. Epub 2016 Feb 16.

引用本文的文献

1
Review of Rhinitis: Classification, Types, Pathophysiology.鼻炎综述:分类、类型、病理生理学
J Clin Med. 2021 Jul 19;10(14):3183. doi: 10.3390/jcm10143183.
2
A Case of Intraoperative Anaphylaxis Caused by Bovine-Derived Thrombin.一例由牛源性凝血酶引起的术中过敏反应病例。
Allergy Asthma Immunol Res. 2018 Mar;10(2):184-186. doi: 10.4168/aair.2018.10.2.184.
3
Allergen-Specific IgE Measurement: Intermethod Comparison of Two Assay Systems in Diagnosing Clinical Allergy.变应原特异性IgE检测:两种检测系统在诊断临床变态反应中的方法间比较
J Clin Lab Anal. 2017 May;31(3). doi: 10.1002/jcla.22047. Epub 2016 Sep 8.
4
Does Spore Count Matter in Fungal Allergy?: The Role of Allergenic Fungal Species.孢子计数在真菌过敏中重要吗?:致敏真菌种类的作用。
Allergy Asthma Immunol Res. 2016 Sep;8(5):404-11. doi: 10.4168/aair.2016.8.5.404.
5
Mold allergens in respiratory allergy: from structure to therapy.呼吸道过敏中的霉菌过敏原:从结构到治疗。
Allergy Asthma Immunol Res. 2015 May;7(3):205-20. doi: 10.4168/aair.2015.7.3.205. Epub 2015 Mar 11.
6
Severe asthma with fungal sensitization.真菌致敏的重度哮喘。
Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2011 Oct;11(5):403-13. doi: 10.1007/s11882-011-0217-4.