4.6 Article

Anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions occurring during anesthesia in France in 1999-2000

期刊

ANESTHESIOLOGY
卷 99, 期 3, 页码 536-545

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/00000542-200309000-00007

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions occurring during anesthesia remain a major cause of concern for anesthesiologists. The authors report the results of a 2-yr survey of such reactions observed during anesthesia in France. Methods: Between January 1, 1999, and December 31, 2000, 789 patients who experienced immune-mediated (anaphylaxis) or nonimmune-mediated (anaphylactoid) reactions were referred to one of the 40 participating centers. Anaphylaxis was diagnosed on the basis of clinical history, skin tests, and/or specific immunoglobulin E assay. Results: Anaphylactic and anaphylactoid reactions were diagnosed in 518 cases (66%) and 271 cases (34%), respectively. The most common causes of anaphylaxis were neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) (n = 306, 58.2%), latex (n = 88, 16.7%), and antibiotics (n = 79, 15.1%). Rocuronium (n = 132, 43.1%) and succinylcholine (n = 69, 22.6%) were the most frequently incriminated NMBAs. Cross-reactivity between NMBAs was observed in 75.1% of cases of anaphylaxis to an NMBA. No difference was observed between anaphylactoid and anaphylactic reactions when the incidences of atopy, asthma, or drug intolerance were compared. However, atopy, asthma, and food allergy were significantly more frequent in the case of latex allergy when compared with NMBA allergy. Clinical manifestations were more severe in anaphylaxis. The positive predictive value of tryptase for the diagnosis of anaphylaxis was 92.6%; the negative predictive value was 54.3%. The diagnostic value of specific NMBA immunoglobulin E assays was confirmed. Conclusions: These results further corroborate the need for systematic screening in the case of anaphylactoid reaction during anesthesia and for the constitution of allergoanesthesia centers to provide expert advice to anesthesiologists and allergists.

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