Section for Clinical Allergology, Department of Occupational Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway.
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2010 May;54(5):536-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2009.02193.x. Epub 2010 Jan 6.
Local anaesthetics (LA) are generally considered safe with respect to allergy. However, various clinical reactions steadily occur. Even though most reactions are manifestations of reflexes to perceptive stimuli, uncertainty often remains regarding a possible allergic mechanism. This uncertainty later leads to an avoidance of local anaesthesia and unnecessarily painful interventions, resource-consuming general anaesthesia or even the risk of re-exposure to other yet unidentified allergens. In the present study, follow-up procedures at an allergy clinic were analysed to examine the frequency of identified causative agents and pathogenetic mechanisms and evaluate the strength of the diagnostic conclusions.
The medical records of 135 cases with alleged allergic reactions to LA were reviewed. Diagnoses were based on case histories, skin tests, subcutaneous challenge tests and in vitro IgE analyses.
Two events (1.5%) were diagnosed as hypersensitivity to LA, articaine-adrenaline and tetracaine-adrenaline, respectively. Ten reactions (7%) were diagnosed as IgE-mediated allergy to other substances including chlorhexidine, latex, triamcinolone and possibly hexaminolevulinate. As challenge testing was not consistently performed with the culprit LA compound, follow-ups were short of definitely refuting hypersensitivity in 61% of the cases. The reported clinical manifestations were in general diagnostically unspecific, but itch and generalised urticaria were most frequent in test-positive cases.
Reactions during local anaesthesia are rarely found to be an IgE-mediated LA allergy. Whenever the clinical picture is compatible with allergy, other allergens should also be tested.
局部麻醉剂(LA)通常被认为在过敏方面是安全的。然而,各种临床反应仍在不断发生。尽管大多数反应是对感知刺激的反射表现,但对于可能的过敏机制仍存在不确定性。这种不确定性后来导致避免局部麻醉和不必要的疼痛干预、资源消耗的全身麻醉,甚至可能重新暴露于其他未识别的过敏原的风险。在本研究中,分析了过敏诊所的随访程序,以检查已确定的致病剂和发病机制的频率,并评估诊断结论的强度。
回顾了 135 例疑似对 LA 过敏反应的病例的医疗记录。诊断基于病史、皮肤试验、皮下挑战试验和体外 IgE 分析。
分别诊断出 2 起(1.5%)对 LA、阿替卡因肾上腺素和四卡因肾上腺素的过敏反应。10 起(7%)反应被诊断为 IgE 介导的对其他物质的过敏,包括洗必泰、乳胶、曲安奈德,可能还有六氨基己酸。由于未一致进行与罪魁祸首 LA 化合物的挑战测试,因此在 61%的病例中,随访缺乏明确反驳过敏的证据。报告的临床表现通常在诊断上没有特异性,但在阳性病例中,瘙痒和全身性荨麻疹最常见。
在局部麻醉期间很少发现是 IgE 介导的 LA 过敏。只要临床表现与过敏相符,也应测试其他过敏原。