4.4 Article

Intranasal ketorolac challenge for the diagnosis of aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease

Journal

ANNALS OF ALLERGY ASTHMA & IMMUNOLOGY
Volume 97, Issue 2, Pages 190-195

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S1081-1206(10)60012-9

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Intranasal administration of aspirin-lysine has been used in Europe for the diagnosis of aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. It has a low adverse effect profile and is believed to be safer for asthmatic patients, particularly those with a low baseline forced expiratory volume in 1 second, in whom oral aspirin challenge would be contraindicated. Ketorolac, a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug useful for severe pain, is available in the United States in parenteral form. Objective: To determine whether ketorolac nasal challenge has acceptable specificity and sensitivity for diagnosing aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease. Methods: Twenty-nine patients with suspected aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease were challenged with nasal ketorolac before oral challenge and desensitization with aspirin. Symptoms, objective changes in nasal examination findings, and peak nasal inspiratory flow values were recorded. Nasal lavage fluid for cysteinyl leukotriene analysis was collected. Ketorolac doses of 2.1, 5.2, or 7.8 mg were administered and compared with the results of oral aspirin challenge. Results: Eighteen patients had a positive challenge reaction to oral aspirin. Ketorolac nasal inhalation had a sensitivity of 78% and a specificity of 64%. Patients in the reactor group had significantly higher levels of cysteinyl leukotrienes after ketorolac challenge than in the nonreactor group. Mild bronchospasm occurred in 3 patients, and 2 of these occurred at higher starting doses of ketorolac. Conclusions: Nasal ketorolac administration is a reasonably accurate and safe method for diagnosing aspirin-exacerbated respiratory disease.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available