Department of Allergy, Southern California Permanente Medical Group, San Diego Medical Center, San Diego, Calif.
Department of Research and Evaluation, Kaiser Permanente Health Care Program, Pasadena, Calif.
J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2013 May-Jun;1(3):258-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jaip.2013.02.002. Epub 2013 Apr 6.
Penicillin skin testing is rarely used to undiagnose penicillin "allergy" in the United States, partially because of concern that commercially available materials are inadequate.
We determined whether skin testing with only commercially available penicilloyl-poly-lysine and penicillin followed by an oral amoxicillin challenge, if skin test-negative, can safely identify clinically significant penicillin allergy.
Five hundred sequential persons with positive history of penicillin "allergy" were evaluated by skin testing with penicilloyl-poly-lysine and penicillin between June 8, 2010, and March 29, 2012. All persons with negative skin tests were given an oral amoxicillin challenge and observed for 1 hour.
Persons undergoing penicillin allergy testing were representative of all health plan members with penicillin allergy. Only 4 persons (0.8%; 95% CI, 0.32%-2.03%) had a positive skin test result. Only 4 persons (0.8%; 95% CI, 0.32%-2.03%) had an acute objective oral amoxicillin challenge reaction. Fifteen persons (3.0%; 95% CI, 1.83%-4.98%) had subjective oral challenge reactions, either acute transient itching or dizziness. All were women and 11 (73.3%) had multiple drug intolerance syndrome. None had severe reactions or objective signs. These were not considered to be positive challenge reactions. Sixty-eight subjects (13.6%) who were negative on testing were exposed to 88 courses of penicillins during 90 days of follow-up. New reactions were reported after 4 courses (4.5%), 3 (75%) occurring in subjects with multiple drug intolerance syndrome.
Penicillin skin testing, using only penicilloyl-poly-lysine and penicillin, followed by oral amoxicillin challenge, if negative, can safely identify clinically significant IgE-mediated penicillin allergy in patients who use health care in the United States at this time.
在美国,很少使用青霉素皮试来诊断青霉素“过敏”,部分原因是担心市售材料不够充分。
我们旨在确定是否仅使用市售的青霉素酰多聚赖氨酸和青霉素进行皮试,然后在皮试阴性时进行口服阿莫西林挑战,能否安全地识别出具有临床意义的青霉素过敏。
2010 年 6 月 8 日至 2012 年 3 月 29 日期间,对 500 例有青霉素“过敏”阳性史的连续患者进行青霉素酰多聚赖氨酸和青霉素皮试。所有皮试阴性的患者均给予口服阿莫西林挑战,并观察 1 小时。
接受青霉素过敏测试的患者代表了所有有青霉素过敏史的健康计划成员。仅有 4 名患者(0.8%;95%置信区间,0.32%-2.03%)皮试结果阳性。仅有 4 名患者(0.8%;95%置信区间,0.32%-2.03%)出现急性客观口服阿莫西林挑战反应。15 名患者(3.0%;95%置信区间,1.83%-4.98%)出现主观口服挑战反应,表现为急性短暂瘙痒或头晕。所有患者均为女性,11 名(73.3%)患有多种药物不耐受综合征。无严重反应或客观体征。这些均不被视为阳性挑战反应。68 名检测结果为阴性的受试者在 90 天的随访中接受了 88 个疗程的青霉素治疗。在 4 个疗程(4.5%)后报告了新的反应,其中 3 个(75%)发生在患有多种药物不耐受综合征的患者中。
目前在美国使用医疗保健的患者中,仅使用青霉素酰多聚赖氨酸和青霉素进行皮试,然后在皮试阴性时进行口服阿莫西林挑战,如果阴性,可以安全地识别出具有临床意义的 IgE 介导的青霉素过敏。