Suppr超能文献

杂草花粉过敏中主要过敏原的相关性。

Relevance of Major Allergens in Weed Pollen Allergy.

机构信息

Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Head and Neck Surgery, Ludwig-Maximilians-University of Munich, Munich, Germany.

出版信息

Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2021;182(7):637-641. doi: 10.1159/000514719. Epub 2021 Apr 9.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Weed pollen allergy is an important and in prevalence increasing cause of pollinosis in Europe and across the world. In this study we focus on the value of common diagnostic tools for detection of a sensitization to mugwort and English plantain, especially with regard to the clinical relevance of the sensitization.

METHODS

Eighty weed pollen sensitized patients (41 to mugwort and 39 to English plantain) were assessed retrospectively regarding their clinical anamnesis, in-vivo tests (skin prick test [SPT] and allergen specific provocation) and in-vitro tests (immunoglobulin E [IgE] reactivity to purified natural allergen extract and specific allergen components in serum).

RESULTS

85% of mugwort and 83% of English plantain sensitizations could be diagnosed by SPT alone. Distinction between allergic and non-allergic patients could be made with clinical challenges solely. IgE serology revealed IgE antibodies against the native pollen extracts for mugwort in 98% and for English plantain in 90% of patients. Detection of major allergens nArt v 1, nArt v 3 and Pla l 1 did not add accuracy to the diagnosis. A vast majority of the weed pollen allergic patients was sensitized to >1 allergen. Minor allergens were found to be of less importance.

CONCLUSION

The exact diagnosis of weed pollen allergy can be challenging due to confounding components in anamnesis and diagnostic tests. IgE-serology does not delineate allergic from sensitized patients. Component resolved diagnostics (CRD) can confirm, but not replace, extract based diagnostic methods, such as SPT, provocation tests or serology to native extracts. Hence, these are the gold standard diagnostic tools in weed pollen allergy up to now.

摘要

简介

杂草花粉过敏是欧洲乃至全球花粉症日益增多的重要原因。本研究重点关注检测葎草和英国车前草过敏的常用诊断工具的价值,特别是在致敏的临床相关性方面。

方法

回顾性评估 80 例杂草花粉致敏患者(41 例对葎草过敏,39 例对英国车前草过敏)的临床病史、体内试验(皮肤点刺试验 [SPT] 和过敏原特异性激发试验)和体外试验(免疫球蛋白 E [IgE] 对纯化天然过敏原提取物和血清中特异性过敏原成分的反应性)。

结果

单独 SPT 可诊断 85%的葎草和 83%的英国车前草致敏。仅通过临床挑战即可区分过敏和非过敏患者。IgE 血清学显示,98%的葎草和 90%的英国车前草患者对天然花粉提取物的 IgE 抗体呈阳性。检测主要过敏原 nArt v 1、nArt v 3 和 Pla l 1 并不能提高诊断的准确性。绝大多数杂草花粉过敏患者对>1 种过敏原敏感。次要过敏原的重要性较小。

结论

由于病史和诊断测试中存在混杂因素,杂草花粉过敏的确切诊断具有挑战性。IgE 血清学不能区分过敏和致敏患者。基于成分的诊断(CRD)可以确认,但不能替代基于提取物的诊断方法,如 SPT、激发试验或针对天然提取物的血清学检测。因此,这些是迄今为止杂草花粉过敏的金标准诊断工具。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验