4.1 Article

Bronchial hyperreactivity in children with antibody deficiencies

期刊

ALLERGOLOGIA ET IMMUNOPATHOLOGIA
卷 43, 期 1, 页码 57-61

出版社

ELSEVIER DOYMA SL
DOI: 10.1016/j.aller.2013.09.014

关键词

Allergy; Antibody deficiency; Bronchial hyperreactivity; IgA deficiency; IgG subclass deficiency

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Antibody deficiency comprises a heterogeneous group of disorders characterised by the body's inability to mount an effective antibody response to pathogens. Although it has been reported that asthma and allergic disease are frequent in antibody deficiencies, there are no data that evaluate and compare bronchial hyperreactivity (BHR) in all groups of antibody deficiencies. In this study, we aimed to evaluate and compare the frequency of BM in patients with different antibody deficiencies. Methods: The study was carried out on 113 patients between ages 5 and 18 diagnosed with antibody deficiencies. The patients and their families were questioned on their history of asthma and allergic diseases. Allergic skin prick tests and non-specific bronchial provocation test with methacholine was done for all patients. Complete blood count and serum total IgE levels were measured. Results: The mean age of the patients was 10.8 +/- 3.8 years and 66.4% were male. Within the study group 41.6% of the patients had selective IgA deficiency, 24.8% had IgG subclass deficiency, 14.2% had partial IgA deficiency, 10.6% had common variable immunodeficiency, 6.2% had transient hypogammaglobulinaennia and 2.7% X-linked agammaglobulinaemia. In total group, 42.5% had bronchial hyperreactivity with methacholine challenge test. BHR was more significant in both patients with selective IgA deficiency and partial IgA deficiency compared to those with IgG subclass deficiency (P = 0.041 and P = 0.038, respectively). Conclusion: BHR was high in antibody deficiencies, especially selective IgA deficiency compared to IgG subclass deficiency. (C) 2013 SEICAP. Published by Elsevier Espana, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据