Juan Pineda A, Prieto Ursúa L, García Caballero R, Huerta López J
Instituto Nacional de Pediatría, Servicio de Alergia.
Rev Alerg Mex (1987). 1990 Jul-Aug;37(4):137-9.
We compared in 50 asthmatic children, the cutaneous response by skin prick test to Dermatophagoides farinae with antigens from two different laboratories (Freeman and Hollister). In order to evaluate the importance of the selection, conservation and standardization of the allergic extracts. 27/50 children had a similar response, in those cases (6) where Freeman was doubtful and Hollister positive the allergic etiology was confirmed by RAST and Challenge tests. In 5 cases, Freeman was negative and Hollister doubtful we only confirm allergic etiology in 1. When both were positive all of them were allergic. The antigen Dermatophagoides farinae from Freeman laboratory needs another diagnostic method, when the cutaneous response is doubtful or negative and the clinical feature is highly suggestive. We don't have to forget the importance of the controls positive and negative.
我们对50名哮喘儿童进行了比较,通过皮肤点刺试验检测他们对来自两个不同实验室(弗里曼实验室和霍利斯特实验室)的粉尘螨抗原的皮肤反应。为了评估变应原提取物的选择、保存和标准化的重要性。50名儿童中有27名反应相似,在弗里曼实验室结果存疑而霍利斯特实验室结果为阳性的6例病例中,通过放射变应原吸附试验(RAST)和激发试验证实了变应性病因。在5例弗里曼实验室结果为阴性而霍利斯特实验室结果存疑的病例中,我们仅在1例中证实了变应性病因。当两者均为阳性时,所有病例均为变应性。当皮肤反应存疑或为阴性且临床特征高度提示时,弗里曼实验室的粉尘螨抗原需要另一种诊断方法。我们不能忽视阳性和阴性对照的重要性。