Search

Background: The diagnosis of allergic rhinitis (AR) is based on cutaneous and serological assessment to determine immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated disease. However, discrepancies between these tests and nasal provocation exist. Patients diagnosed as non-allergic rhinitis (NAR) but with positive nasal allergen provocation test (NAPT) may represent a local allergic condition or entopy, still suitable to allergy interventions. The objective of this study was to determine the frequency of nasal reactivity toward allergens among AR and NAR patients, and to describe the diagnostic characteristics of NAPT methodologies., Methods: EMBASE (1947-) and Medline (1946-) were searched until December 8, 2015. A search strategy was used to identify studies on AR or NAR patients subjected to diagnostic local nasal provocation. All studies providing original NAPT data among the AR or NAR population were included. Meta-analysis of proportion data was presented as a weighted probability % (95% confidence interval [CI])., Results: The search yielded 4504 studies and 46 were included. The probability of nasal allergen reactivity for the AR population was 86.3% (95% CI, 84.4 to 88.1) and in NAR was 24.7% (95% CI, 22.3 to 27.2). Reactivity was high with pollen for both AR 97.1% (95% CI, 94.2 to 99.2) and NAR 47.5% (95% CI, 34.8 to 60.4), and lowest with dust for both AR 79.1% (95% CI, 76.4 to 81.6) and NAR 12.2% (95% CI, 9.9 to 14.7). NAPT yielded high positivity when defined by subjective end-points: AR 91.0% (95% CI, 86.6 to 94.8) and NAR 30.2% (95% CI, 22.9 to 37.9); and lower with objective end-points: AR 80.8% (95% CI, 76.8 to 84.5) and NAR 14.1% (95% CI, 11.2 to 17.2)., Conclusion: Local allergen reactivity is demonstrated in 26.5% of patients previously considered non-allergic. Similarly, AR, when defined by skin-prick test (SPT) or serum specific IgE (sIgE), may lead to 13.7% of patients with inaccurate allergen sensitization or non-allergic etiologies., (© 2017 ARS-AAOA, LLC.)

Objective: To examine patterns of airborne allergen (aeroallergen) sensitisation in the Greater Sydney area (Sydney), and their relationships with climate, coastal proximity and environment (urban v regional)., Design, Setting, Participants: Retrospective cross-sectional study of patients who underwent aeroallergen skin prick testing at three Sydney allergy clinics, January 2001 - October 2014., Main Outcome Measurements: Proportions of patients sensitised to specific aeroallergen types; relationships between sensitisation patterns and climate and geography., Results: Of 1421 patients who met the selection criteria (mean age, 28.3 years [SD, 21.3]; 53.3% were female), 1092 (76.8%) were sensitised to at least one aeroallergen. Those living less than 15 km from the coast were less commonly sensitised to cockroach (< 15 km, 15.1%; 15-30 km, 40.0%; > 30 km, 39.7%; P < 0.001) and grass aeroallergens (< 15 km, 36.5%; 15-30 km, 52.2%; > 30 km, 58.1%; P < 0.001) than patients further inland; the same applied to mould, weed and tree aeroallergens. Subtropical grass sensitisation was more common in temperate/warm summer climates (about 50%) than in temperate/hot summer (27.1%) or subtropical climates (15%) (P < 0.001), and less common in urban (36.7%) than in regional areas (54%; P = 0.014). 72.4% of grass-sensitised patients were co-sensitised to both temperate and subtropical grasses. A selected ten-aeroallergen skin prick test panel identified 98.5% of atopic patients in this Sydney sample., Conclusions: Environmental and geographic factors are associated with different patterns of allergic sensitisation in Sydney. Extensive co-sensitisation to subtropical and temperate grasses has implications for immunotherapy in Australia, where most currently available therapies are based on formulations directed at temperate grasses only.

Background: Nasal obstruction, triggered by allergic rhinitis, often does not resolve with allergen-specific immunotherapy (AIT) alone, thus inferior turbinate reduction surgery (ITR) may be required. This study aims to investigate the impact of combined treatment on nasal obstruction, as evidence is currently limited. Methodology/Principal: A retrospective cohort study of perennial allergic rhinitis patients experiencing nasal obstruction and undergoing ≥12 months AIT was conducted. Two groups were derived, those undergoing AIT—with or without an ITR. Patient reported nasal obstruction (evaluated with questionnaires) and nasal airway function (Nasal Peak Inspiratory Flow [NPIF] and Nasal Airflow Resistance [NAR]) were monitored. The change from baseline to 12 months post-treatment in each group were compared. Results: A total of 118 patients (33.71 ± 14.43 years, 41.5% female) were recruited, 72% had AIT and 28% AIT&ITR. At baseline, the AIT&ITR group had a higher level of nasal obstruction (>moderate%; 63.6% vs 52.9%, P =.048). Post treatment, AIT&ITR group reported greater reduction in nasal obstruction (>1 category change: 75.8% vs 48.2%, P =.002). Similarly, the AIT&ITR group had greater improvement in nasal function by NPIF (−13.9 ± 110.3 L/minute vs −3.4 ± 78.1 L/minute, P =.049) and NAR (−0.120 ± 0.342 Pa/cm³/second vs −0.093 ± 0.224 Pa/cm³/second, P =.050). Conclusions: Allergic rhinitis patients, with moderate to severe nasal obstruction, who undergo combined AIT&ITR have greater relief of nasal obstruction and improved airflow analysis compared to AIT alone. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]