Suppr超能文献

在一项针对芝麻过敏成年患者的临床试验中,诊断测试与口服食物激发试验的比较。

Comparison of Diagnostic Tests with Oral Food Challenge in a Clinical Trial for Adult Patients with Sesame Anaphylaxis.

作者信息

Salari Fereshteh, Bemanian Mohammad Hassan, Fallahpour Morteza, Tavakol Marzieh, Shokri Sima, Baniadam Leila, Khoshmirsafa Majid, Seif Farhad, Nabavi Mohammad, Arshi Saba

机构信息

Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Rasool-E-Akram Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

Non-communicable Diseases Research Center, Alborz University of Medical Science, Karaj, Iran.

出版信息

Iran J Allergy Asthma Immunol. 2020 Feb 1;19(1):27-34. doi: 10.18502/ijaai.v19i1.2415.

Abstract

Sesame food allergy (SFA); especially anaphylaxis, is a life-threatening condition. The accurate diagnosis of SFA is done by skin prick test (SPT), skin prick to prick (SPP) or specific IgE (sIgE) and is confirmed by oral food challenge (OFC). Since there are few studies evaluating and comparing the utility of these methods for diagnosis of sesame anaphylaxis in adult patients, we aimed to compare OFC with diagnostic tests, including SPT, SPP, and sesames IgE; using ImmunoCAP considering the sensitivity and specificity issues in patients with sesame anaphylaxis. Twenty patients with sesame anaphylaxis were diagnosed based on OFC. Then SPT, SPP, and sIgE were evaluated. Sixteen patients had positive OFC; while 4 patients had negative results. Out of 16 OFC+ patients, 7 patients were SPT+, 15 patients were SPP+, and 2 patients had detectable sIgE. A positive SPT indicated 44% sensitivity and 50% specificity. A positive SPP showed 87.5% sensitivity and 75% specificity. A positive ImmunoCAP test demonstrated 12.5% sensitivity and 75% specificity. The AUC of SPP was significant for the diagnosis of sesame anaphylaxis (p=0.038). In conclusion, when the OFC is not possible, the SPP test with natural sesame seed may be applicable in patients with a convincing history instead of the artificial or commercial extracts of sesame used for SPT. Positive SPP is a good alternative diagnostic method for patients with sesame anaphylaxis. Also, the poor sensitivity of SPT and sIgE may indicate the poor discriminative capability of these tests.

摘要

芝麻食物过敏(SFA);尤其是过敏反应,是一种危及生命的病症。SFA的准确诊断通过皮肤点刺试验(SPT)、点点刺试验(SPP)或特异性IgE(sIgE)进行,并通过口服食物激发试验(OFC)予以确认。由于评估和比较这些方法在成年患者中诊断芝麻过敏实用性的研究较少,我们旨在将OFC与包括SPT、SPP和芝麻sIgE在内的诊断测试进行比较;使用ImmunoCAP并考虑芝麻过敏患者的敏感性和特异性问题。20例芝麻过敏患者基于OFC被诊断出来。然后对SPT、SPP和sIgE进行评估。16例患者OFC呈阳性;而4例患者结果为阴性。在16例OFC阳性患者中,7例患者SPT阳性,15例患者SPP阳性,2例患者可检测到sIgE。阳性SPT显示敏感性为44%,特异性为50%。阳性SPP显示敏感性为87.5%,特异性为75%。阳性ImmunoCAP测试显示敏感性为12.5%,特异性为75%。SPP的曲线下面积对于芝麻过敏的诊断具有显著性(p = 0.038)。总之,当无法进行OFC时,对于有可靠病史的患者,使用天然芝麻籽的SPP试验可能比用于SPT的人工或商业芝麻提取物更适用。阳性SPP是芝麻过敏患者的一种良好替代诊断方法。此外,SPT和sIgE的低敏感性可能表明这些测试的鉴别能力较差。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验