4.6 Article

Factors increasing the risk for a severe reaction in anaphylaxis: An analysis of data from The European Anaphylaxis Registry

期刊

ALLERGY
卷 73, 期 6, 页码 1322-1330

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/all.13380

关键词

age; anaphylaxis; logistic regression; mastocytosis; risk factors

资金

  1. Network for OnlineRegistration of Anaphylaxis NORA e. V.
  2. Uniwersytet Jagiellonski Collegium Medicum [K/ZDS/006266]
  3. National Children's Research Centre, Dublin, Ireland
  4. Veneto Region Government, Italy
  5. Pomeranian Medical University of Szczecin Research Fund [WLA-151-01/S/12]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BackgroundPreventive measures to decrease the frequency and intensity of anaphylactic events are essential to provide optimal care for allergic patients. Aggravating factors may trigger or increase the severity of anaphylaxis and therefore need to be recognized and avoided. ObjectiveTo identify and prioritize factors associated with an increased risk of developing severe anaphylaxis. MethodsData from the Anaphylaxis Registry (122 centers in 11 European countries) were used in logistic regression models considering existing severity grading systems, elicitors, and symptoms to identify the relative risk of factors on the severity of anaphylaxis. ResultsWe identified higher age and concomitant mastocytosis (OR: 3.1, CI: 2.6-3.7) as the most important predictors for an increased risk of severe anaphylaxis. Vigorous physical exercise (OR: 1.5, CI: 1.3-1.7), male sex (OR: 1.2, CI: 1.1-1.3), and psychological burden (OR: 1.4, CI: 1.2-1.6) were more often associated with severe reactions. Additionally, intake of beta-blockers (OR: 1.9, CI: 1.5-2.2) and ACE-I (OR: 1.28, CI: 1.05, 1.51) in temporal proximity to allergen exposition was identified as an important factor in logistic regression analysis. ConclusionOur data suggest it may be possible to identify patients who require intensified preventive measures due to their relatively higher risk for severe anaphylaxis by considering endogenous and exogenous factors.

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

4.6
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