首页> 外文期刊>International archives of allergy and immunology >Risk assessment of hymenoptera re-sting frequency: implications for decision-making in venom immunotherapy.
【24h】

Risk assessment of hymenoptera re-sting frequency: implications for decision-making in venom immunotherapy.

机译:膜翅目寄居频率的风险评估:对毒液免疫治疗决策的影响。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background: Venom immunotherapy is highly efficacious in preventing anaphylactic sting reactions. However, there is an ongoing discussion regarding patient selection and whether and how to apply a cost-benefit analysis of venom immunotherapy. In order to help decision-making, we investigated the re-sting frequency of hymenoptera-venom-allergic patients to single out those at high risk. Methods: In this retrospective study, re-sting data of 96 bee-venom-allergic patients and 95 vespid-venom-allergic patients living mainly in a rural area of Switzerland were analyzed. Hymenoptera venom allergy status was rated according to the classification system of H.L. Mueller [J Asthma Res 1966;3:331-333]. Different risk-groups were defined according to sting exposure and their median sting-free interval was calculated. Results: The risk factors for a wasp or bee re-sting were outdoor occupation, beekeeping and habitation close to a bee-house. Half of all vespid-venom-allergic outdoor workers were re-stung within 3.75 years compared to 7.5 years for indoor workers. Similarly, 50% of the bee-venom-allergic beekeepers or subjects with a bee-house in the vicinity suffered a bee re-sting within 5.25 years compared to 10.75 years for individuals who were not beekeepers. Conclusions: The high degree of exposure of vespid-venom-allergic outdoor workers and bee-venom-allergic beekeepers and subjects living close to bee-houses underlines the high benefit of venom immunotherapy for these patients even if they suffered a non-life-threatening grade II reaction. Yet, bee-venom-allergic individuals with no proximity to bee-houses and with an indoor occupation face a very low exposure risk, which justifies epinephrine rescue treatment for these patients especially if they have suffered from grade II sting reactions.
机译:背景:毒液免疫疗法在预防过敏性刺痛反应方面非常有效。然而,关于患者选择以及是否以及如何进行毒液免疫治疗的成本效益分析,正在进行中。为了帮助决策,我们调查了膜翅目-毒液-过敏患者的重新治疗频率,以挑选出高危人群。方法:在这项回顾性研究中,分析了主要生活在瑞士农村地区的96名蜂毒过敏患者和95名黄蜂毒过敏患者的研究数据。根据H.L. Mueller的分类系统[J Asthma Res 1966; 3:331-333]对膜翅目毒液过敏状况进行了评估。根据刺痛暴露定义不同的风险组,并计算其中位无刺痛间隔。结果:黄蜂或蜜蜂重新栖息的危险因素是户外活动,养蜂和在养蜂场附近居住。在所有对黄蜂毒液过敏的户外工人中,有一半在3.75年内被再次刺痛,而室内工人则为7.5年。同样,附近有养蜂场的蜂毒过敏养蜂人或受养者中有50%在5.25年内遭受养蜂,而非养蜂人则为10.75年。结论:蜂毒过敏户外工作人员和蜂毒过敏养蜂人以及居住在养蜂场附近的受试者的大量暴露强调了毒液免疫疗法对这些患者的高收益,即使他们遭受了无生命威胁二级反应。然而,与养蜂场不近且在室内工作的蜂毒过敏者面临的暴露风险非常低,这为这些患者进行肾上腺素抢救​​治疗是合理的,特别是如果他们患有II级刺痛反应。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号