4.5 Article

British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology guidelines for the management of egg allergy

Journal

CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL ALLERGY
Volume 40, Issue 8, Pages 1116-1129

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2222.2010.03557.x

Keywords

adrenaline; aetiology; allergy; anaphylaxis; BSACI; diagnosis; egg; epinephrine; food; influenza; management; MMR; SOCC; vaccines; yellow fever

Ask authors/readers for more resources

P>This guideline advises on the management of patients with egg allergy. Most commonly, egg allergy presents in infancy, with a prevalence of approximately 2% in children and 0.1% in adults. A clear clinical history and the detection of egg white-specific IgE (by skin prick test or serum assay) will confirm the diagnosis in most cases. Egg avoidance advice is the cornerstone of management. Egg allergy often resolves and re-introduction can be achieved at home if reactions have been mild and there is no asthma. Patients with a history of severe reactions or asthma should have reintroduction guided by a specialist. All children with egg allergy should receive measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccination. Influenza and yellow fever vaccines should only be considered in egg-allergic patients under the guidance of an allergy specialist. This guideline was prepared by the Standards of Care Committee (SOCC) of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) and is intended for allergists and others with a special interest in allergy. The recommendations are evidence-based but where evidence was lacking consensus was reached by the panel of specialists on the committee. The document encompasses epidemiology, risk factors, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis and co-morbid associations. Cite this as: A. T. Clark, I. Skypala, S. C. Leech, P. W. Ewan, P. Dugue, N. Brathwaite, P. A. J. Huber and S. M. Nasser, Clinical & Experimental Allergy, 2010 (40) 1116-1129.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available