Hayden M L, Perzanowski M, Matheson L, Scott P, Call R S, Platts-Mills T A
Department of Medicine, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA.
Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1997 Nov;79(5):437-42. doi: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)63040-2.
Asthma is a leading cause of hospital admission in children. The majority of children with asthma are sensitized and exposed to inhalant allergens that may contribute to chronic airway inflammation.
To evaluate the practicality and effects of dust mite (D. farinae and D. pteronyssinus) allergen avoidance in homes of children hospitalized with acute asthma.
Children 5 to 18 years of age who were admitted with asthma to a suburban Atlanta hospital were randomly assigned, without knowledge of allergen sensitization or exposure in their houses, to active (n = 13) or placebo (n = 10) treatment group. Active treatment included encasing mattress, box springs, and pillows in allergen impermeable covers; weekly hot water wash of bed linens; replacement of bedroom carpet with polished flooring; and 3% tannic acid spray to living room carpet. Placebo treatment included permeable encasing for bedding, cold water wash, and water spray for carpet. Dust samples were analyzed for dust mite, cockroach, and cat allergens, while serum samples were analyzed for IgE antibodies to the same allergens. Outcome measures included daily peak expiratory flow rates, spirometry, methacholine inhalation challenge, and hospital readmission.
Children in both groups were similar by demographics, sensitization, and exposure to dust mite allergen. Allergen levels fell > 3-fold in many active and placebo homes. Children in the active group had improved PEFR at 3 and 6 months after intervention (P < .04, P < .05, respectively). Six of seven children in the study who were sensitized and exposed to dust mite allergen demonstrated improved PEFR at 3 months when allergen levels fell in both bedding and bedroom floor. There was no difference in FEV1 or methacholine challenge, although a few children in either group could tolerate methacholine because of bronchial hyperreactivity. Six children (four active and two placebo) were readmitted to hospital during the study.
Increases in PEFR were recorded among children in the active treatment group and also among sensitized patients whose dust mite allergens fell. These results support the hypothesis that avoidance can be effective even among children admitted to hospital. The study was complicated by insufficient numbers of mite-allergic children and poor compliance with diaries and the protocol. Recruitment from the hospital resulted in participants with more severe asthma than anticipated. The results also suggest that many of the patients in this group will continue to have exacerbations triggered by upper or lower respiratory tract infections.
哮喘是儿童住院的主要原因。大多数哮喘儿童对吸入性过敏原敏感并暴露于其中,这可能导致慢性气道炎症。
评估在因急性哮喘住院的儿童家中避免尘螨(粉尘螨和屋尘螨)过敏原的实用性和效果。
将入住亚特兰大郊区一家医院的5至18岁哮喘儿童,在不了解其房屋内过敏原致敏或暴露情况的前提下,随机分配至积极治疗组(n = 13)或安慰剂组(n = 10)。积极治疗包括用防过敏原的床罩包裹床垫、弹簧床垫和枕头;每周用热水清洗床单;将卧室地毯更换为抛光地板;并用3%的鞣酸喷雾处理客厅地毯。安慰剂治疗包括使用可渗透的床罩包裹、冷水清洗以及对地毯喷水。对灰尘样本进行尘螨、蟑螂和猫过敏原分析,同时对血清样本进行针对相同过敏原的IgE抗体分析。观察指标包括每日呼气峰值流速、肺功能测定、乙酰甲胆碱吸入激发试验以及再次住院情况。
两组儿童在人口统计学特征、致敏情况以及对尘螨过敏原的暴露方面相似。许多积极治疗组和安慰剂组家庭中的过敏原水平下降了3倍以上。积极治疗组儿童在干预后3个月和6个月时呼气峰值流速有所改善(分别为P <.04,P <.05)。研究中7名对尘螨过敏原致敏且暴露的儿童中有6名在3个月时,当床上用品和卧室地板上的过敏原水平下降时,呼气峰值流速有所改善。第一秒用力呼气容积(FEV1)或乙酰甲胆碱激发试验没有差异,尽管两组中少数儿童由于支气管高反应性能够耐受乙酰甲胆碱。在研究期间,有6名儿童(4名积极治疗组和2名安慰剂组)再次住院。
积极治疗组儿童以及尘螨过敏原水平下降的致敏患者的呼气峰值流速均有所增加。这些结果支持了即使在住院儿童中避免过敏原也可能有效的假设。该研究因对尘螨过敏儿童数量不足以及对日记和方案的依从性差而变得复杂。从医院招募的参与者哮喘病情比预期更严重。结果还表明,该组中的许多患者仍会因上呼吸道或下呼吸道感染引发病情加重。