Search

Suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy is a frequent clinical circumstance that influences antimicrobial prescription and often leads to the avoidable use of less efficacious and/or more toxic or costly drugs than first-line antimicrobials. Optimizing antimicrobial therapy in patients with antibiotic allergy labels has become one of the priorities of antimicrobial stewardship programs in several countries. These guidelines aim to make recommendations for the systematic approach to patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy based on current evidence. An expert panel (11 members of various scientific societies) formulated questions about the management of patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy. A systematic literature review was performed by a medical librarian. The questions were distributed among panel members who selected the most relevant references, summarized the evidence, and formulated graded recommendations when possible. The answers to all the questions were finally reviewed by all panel members. A systematic approach to patients with suspected or confirmed antibiotic allergy was recommended to improve antibiotic selection and, consequently, clinical outcomes. A clinically oriented, 3-category risk-stratification strategy was recommended for patients with suspected antibiotic allergy. Complementary assessments should consider both clinical risk category and preferred antibiotic agent. Empirical therapy recommendations for the most relevant clinical syndromes in patients with suspected or confirmed ß-lactam allergy were formulated, as were recommendations on the implementation and monitoring of the impact of the guidelines. Antimicrobial stewardship programs and allergists should design and implement activities that facilitate the most appropriate use of antibiotics in these patients.

Background and Objectives: Allergology has been a recognized medical specialty in Spain, with fully defined aims and competencies for more than 4 decades. However, in recent years, its visibility seems to have decreased somewhat. Objectives: To identify which specific factors have contributed to the waning of the importance of the specialty and find tangible solutions to consolidate its place as a front-line medical specialty., Material and Methods: An online population survey comprising 60 items of interest was prepared. The degree of agreement and the level of satisfaction with each item were assessed, and implementable initiatives in the short, medium, and long terms were defined in order to provide solutions to the issues identified., Results: The survey was completed by a total of 167 specialists with an average of 18 years' experience. Most were from public reference hospitals, and 29.3% were heads of department. The line of action for which a good degree of agreement was achieved was to promote the inclusion of an allergist in multidisciplinary teams. The priority lines of action were to improve undergraduate and graduate training in allergology and specialized nursing, to identify curricula in Spain, and to develop robust teaching projects., Conclusions: The results revealed a high degree of homogeneity between professionals. The basic pillars highlighted were as follows: quality training, knowledge, and research in immunotherapy; an innovative portfolio of services endorsed by clinical practice guidelines; and presence in multidisciplinary teams and relevant hospital committees.

The objective of these guidelines is to ensure efficient and effective clinical practice. The panel of experts who produced this consensus document developed a research protocol based on a review of the literature. The prevalence of allergic reactions to iodinated contrast media (ICM) is estimated to be 1:170 000, that is, 0.05%-0.1% of patients undergoing radiologic studies with ICM (more than 75 million examinations per year worldwide). Hypersensitivity reactions can appear within the first hour after administration (immediate reactions) or from more than 1 hour to several days after administration (nonimmediate or delayed reactions). The risk factors for immediate reactions include poorly controlled bronchial asthma, concomitant medication (eg, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, ß-blockers, and proton-pump inhibitors), rapid administration of the ICM, mastocytosis, autoimmune diseases, and viral infections. The most common symptoms of immediate reactions are erythema and urticaria with or without angioedema, which appear in more than 70% of patients. Maculopapular rash is the most common skin feature of nonimmediate reactions (30%-90%). Skin and in vitro tests should be performed for diagnosis of both immediate and nonimmediate reactions. The ICM to be administered will therefore be chosen depending on the results of these tests, the ICM that induced the reaction (when known), the severity of the reaction, the availability of alternative ICM, and the information available on potential ICM cross-reactivity. Another type of contrast media, gadolinium derivatives, is used used for magnetic resonance imaging. Although rare, IgE-mediated reactions to gadolinium derivatives have been reported.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) are used worldwide and are responsible for several types of drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) in all age groups. The 2 major groups of DHRs to NSAIDs are those induced by immunological mechanisms (selective reactions) and those where inflammatory mediators are released through activation of the prostaglandin-leukotriene pathway without specific immunological recognition (cross-intolerance). In the present review, we focus on cross-intolerance reactions, which are the most frequent DHRs and are becoming a topic of major interest in children and adolescents. Paracetamol and ibuprofen are the drugs that most frequently cause DHRs in children; other NSAIDs are responsible for reactions in adolescents. In vivo and in vitro tests are of limited diagnostic value, with some exceptions for the less common selective reactions. In cross-intolerance, the clinical history and controlled administration are in many instances the only way to establish a diagnosis and look for alternatives. The clinical history is diagnostic when consistent symptoms occur repeatedly after exposure to NSAIDs with different chemical structures. Cutaneous and respiratory symptoms often co-occur in young children. The natural history of these reactions in children is unknown, and some patients can develop tolerance over time. Atopy remains a major risk factor for cross-intolerant reactions. The increasing interest in hypersensitivity to NSAIDs with improvements in patient phenotyping and the information provided by pharmacogenetics will improve our understanding and management of these reactions in the near future.

The Drug Allergy Committee of the Spanish Society of Allergology and Clinical Immunology reviewed the allergenic potential of several substances of food origin that are found in the composition of some drugs. Despite recent legislation on labeling, many labels do not clearly state whether the drug contains raw material (active ingredients, excipient, or other manufacturing intermediate) with an origin in any of the substances in the list of the 14 groups of food allergens that are subject to mandatory declaration. The objective of legislation is that the drug package, the Summary of Product Characteristics, and the patient information leaflet clearly state the food content in order to improve the safety of allergic patients. Therefore, any food or allergen derivative that must be declared should be clearly stated on the drug label. Of all the evaluated products, egg and milk derivatives are the most frequently discussed in literature reviews. The natural or synthetic origin of potentially allergenic substances such as lysozyme, casein, lactose, albumin, phosphatide, and aromatic essences should be clearly stated. Providing this information has 2 clear advantages. First, allergic reactions to drugs in patients with food allergy could be avoided (if the substances have a natural origin). Second, prescription would improve by not restricting drugs containing synthetic substances (which do not usually induce allergic reactions).

Introduction: Anisakis simplex can be a cause of digestive symptoms. Our aim was to evaluate the epidemiological antecedents and immunological data available for a differentiation between patients with anisakidosis and those with other acute abdominal problems., Patients and Methods: this is a prospective cohort study involving 134 patients with acute abdominal problems: 52 patients were diagnosed with anisakidosis by means of surgical and pathological findings and/or specific IgE seroconversion against Anisakis simplex (group A), and in 82 patients anisakidosis had been ruled out (group NA: non-anisakidosis). We evaluated the antecedent of raw fish ingestion, the skin prick test, and IgE immunoblotting as diagnostic tools., Results: patients in groups A and NA differ in terms of prior raw fish ingestion (p < 0.0001) and positive SPT (p < 0.0001), with their respective negative predictive values (NPV) being 98.39% (95%CI: 90.17-99.92) and 95.56% (95%CI: 83.64-99.23). Regarding immunoblotting, in 86.2% of patients in group A a band of 60 kDa was detected, which was also detected in 19.2% of patients in group NA., Conclusions: a negative answer to the question about raw or undercooked fish ingestion has very high sensitivity and NPV (98.39%), and is thus reasonably reliable to rule out anisakidosis. The absence of cutaneous sensitization to crude A. simplex extract gives a high probability (95.56%) that the illness is absent. The presence of a band of about 60 kDa in immunoblotting would be useful for diagnosis.