Nakashima K
Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Tottori University School of Medicine.
Arerugi. 1990 Apr;39(4):410-7.
Skin test, radioallergosorbent test (RAST) and nasal provocation test were carried out on 392 patients to detect house dust (HD) and mites as causative allergens. This study was undertaken to evaluate the difference between the results of skin test, RAST and nasal provocation test. The results were as follows: 1. The frequency of positive intradermal test to mites was high regardless of age. But possibility of false positive results existed and this possibility increased with the patient's age. 2. RAST to mites was significantly higher than that to HD. In diagnosing HD allergy, measuring RAST to mites was more useful than measuring that to HD. 3. In pediatric patients, it could be assumed that measuring RAST to mites was the most applicable technique for diagnosing HD and mites as causative allergens. 4. The combination of intradermal test to HD and scratch test to mites was considered to be a useful screening skin test in diagnosing HD allergy. 5. Both the end point and reaction criteria of intradermal test were significantly correlated with the results of RAST and nasal provocation test.
对392例患者进行了皮肤试验、放射变应原吸附试验（RAST）和鼻激发试验，以检测屋尘（HD）和螨虫作为致敏原。本研究旨在评估皮肤试验、RAST和鼻激发试验结果之间的差异。结果如下：1. 无论年龄大小，螨虫皮内试验阳性率都很高。但存在假阳性结果的可能性，且这种可能性随患者年龄增加而增大。2. 螨虫的RAST显著高于屋尘的RAST。在诊断屋尘过敏时，检测螨虫的RAST比检测屋尘的RAST更有用。3. 在儿科患者中，可以认为检测螨虫的RAST是诊断屋尘和螨虫作为致敏原的最适用技术。4. 屋尘皮内试验和螨虫划痕试验相结合被认为是诊断屋尘过敏的一种有用的筛查皮肤试验。5. 皮内试验的终点和反应标准均与RAST和鼻激发试验的结果显著相关。
