Hurst David S, Gordon Bruce R, McDaniel Alan B, Poe Dennis S
Department of Otolaryngology, Tufts University, Boston 02111, MA, USA.
Department of Laryngology & Otology, Harvard University, Boston, MA 02114, USA.
Diagnostics (Basel). 2021 Apr 24;11(5):763. doi: 10.3390/diagnostics11050763.
The purpose of this study was to determine whether the sensitivity advantage of intradermal dilutional testing (IDT) is clinically relevant in patients with obstructive Eustachian tube dysfunction (ETD) or otitis media with effusion (OME). This retrospective, private-practice cohort study compared the sensitivity of skin prick tests (SPT) vs. IDT in 110 adults and children with suspected allergy and OME. measure was symptom resolution from allergy immunotherapy (AIT). IDT identified 57% more patients as being allergic, and 8.6 times more reactive allergens than would have been diagnosed using only SPT. Patients diagnosed by IDT had the same degree of symptom improvement from immunotherapy, independent of allergen sensitivity (66% by SPT vs. 63% by IDT; = 0.69, not different). Low-sensitivity allergy tests, which may fail to identify allergy in over two thirds of children aged 3 to 15 as being atopic, or among 60% of patients with ETD, may explain why many physicians do not consider allergy as a treatable etiology for their patient's OME/ETD. IDT offers superior sensitivity over SPT for detecting allergens clinically relevant to treating OME/ETD. These data strongly support increased utilization of intradermal testing and invite additional clinical outcome studies.
本研究的目的是确定皮内稀释试验(IDT)的敏感性优势在患有阻塞性咽鼓管功能障碍(ETD)或中耳积液(OME)的患者中是否具有临床相关性。这项回顾性的私人诊所队列研究比较了110名疑似过敏和OME的成人及儿童中皮肤点刺试验(SPT)与IDT的敏感性。衡量指标是过敏免疫疗法(AIT)后的症状缓解情况。IDT识别出的过敏患者比仅使用SPT诊断出的多57%,反应性过敏原比仅使用SPT诊断出的多8.6倍。通过IDT诊断的患者从免疫疗法中获得的症状改善程度相同,与过敏原敏感性无关(SPT为66%,IDT为63%;P = 0.69,无差异)。低敏感性过敏测试可能无法识别超过三分之二的3至15岁特应性儿童或60%的ETD患者的过敏情况,这可能解释了为什么许多医生不认为过敏是其患者OME/ETD的可治疗病因。对于检测与治疗OME/ETD临床相关的过敏原,IDT比SPT具有更高的敏感性。这些数据有力地支持增加皮内试验的应用,并引发了更多的临床结局研究。