Anafilaxia perioperatória em Coimbra: Experiência da consulta de alergia a fármacos

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Faria, E
Data de Publicação: 2008
Outros Autores: Sousa, N, Geraldes, L, Santos, A, Chieira, C
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1270
Resumo: Background: The incidence of peri-operative anaphylactic reactions ranges from 1:10,000 to 1:20,000. It is crucial to identify the risk factors, the trigger agent and to fi nd adequate alternatives. Aims: To characterise patients with peri-operative anaphylactic reactions. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of patients with suspected adverse peri-operative reactions to anaesthetic drugs, observed in a Drug Allergy Outpatients Clinic from 1994 to 2005. Anaphylaxis was diagnosed based on the clinical history and skin tests to latex, neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA), hypnotics, opioids and antibiotics. Specifi c IgE to latex was performed in patients with positive skin-prick-tests. Results: We evaluated the clinical charts of 45 patients with adverse peri-operative reactions, 39 of whom were female. Anaphylaxis was diagnosed in 16 patients (35.6%), 15 females, mean age 36.3 years. The remaining patients had non-anaphylactic (28.8%) or not well-characterised reactions (35.6%). In terms of severity, 50% presented grade III and 50% grade IV anaphylaxis. Skin-prick-tests were positive to latex in three patients and negative to all anaesthetic drugs. Intradermal skin tests were positive in 10 out of 16 patients with anaphylactic reactions: 10 to NMBA [atracurium (n = 8), vecuronium (n = 4), suxamethonium (n = 4) and pancuronium (n = 2)], one to fentanyl, one to thiopental and one to cefuroxime. In three cases, the culprit agent was not identifi ed. In four patients, at least one alternative NMBA, with no skin test reactivity, was found. Of these four patients, two underwent further surgical procedures without adverse reactions. Five patients had previously had two or more anaesthetic procedures and four had presented adverse reactions in prior surgeries. Conclusions: In our study the most common causes of anaphylaxis were NMBAs (62.5%) and latex (18.7%), in line with that described in the literature. In 81% of patients with anaphylactic reactions, skin tests were positive to at least one anaesthetic drug or to latex. A high incidence of severe anaphylaxis was found, probably because cases with less severe clinical signs were not referred to our clinic. The results emphasise the need for systematic evaluation of anaphylactic reactions during anaesthesia. This can be achieved by the creation of a specialised Allergo-Anaesthesia Clinic, as has been the case in our Department.
id RCAP_051b17cd61c4aa7533a148c43c3d894b
oai_identifier_str oai:rihuc.huc.min-saude.pt:10400.4/1270
network_acronym_str RCAP
network_name_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository_id_str 7160
spelling Anafilaxia perioperatória em Coimbra: Experiência da consulta de alergia a fármacosPeri-operative anaphylaxis in Coimbra: the experience of our drug allergy clinicAnafilaxiaHipersensibilidade a MedicamentosCuidados Peri-operatóriosBackground: The incidence of peri-operative anaphylactic reactions ranges from 1:10,000 to 1:20,000. It is crucial to identify the risk factors, the trigger agent and to fi nd adequate alternatives. Aims: To characterise patients with peri-operative anaphylactic reactions. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of patients with suspected adverse peri-operative reactions to anaesthetic drugs, observed in a Drug Allergy Outpatients Clinic from 1994 to 2005. Anaphylaxis was diagnosed based on the clinical history and skin tests to latex, neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA), hypnotics, opioids and antibiotics. Specifi c IgE to latex was performed in patients with positive skin-prick-tests. Results: We evaluated the clinical charts of 45 patients with adverse peri-operative reactions, 39 of whom were female. Anaphylaxis was diagnosed in 16 patients (35.6%), 15 females, mean age 36.3 years. The remaining patients had non-anaphylactic (28.8%) or not well-characterised reactions (35.6%). In terms of severity, 50% presented grade III and 50% grade IV anaphylaxis. Skin-prick-tests were positive to latex in three patients and negative to all anaesthetic drugs. Intradermal skin tests were positive in 10 out of 16 patients with anaphylactic reactions: 10 to NMBA [atracurium (n = 8), vecuronium (n = 4), suxamethonium (n = 4) and pancuronium (n = 2)], one to fentanyl, one to thiopental and one to cefuroxime. In three cases, the culprit agent was not identifi ed. In four patients, at least one alternative NMBA, with no skin test reactivity, was found. Of these four patients, two underwent further surgical procedures without adverse reactions. Five patients had previously had two or more anaesthetic procedures and four had presented adverse reactions in prior surgeries. Conclusions: In our study the most common causes of anaphylaxis were NMBAs (62.5%) and latex (18.7%), in line with that described in the literature. In 81% of patients with anaphylactic reactions, skin tests were positive to at least one anaesthetic drug or to latex. A high incidence of severe anaphylaxis was found, probably because cases with less severe clinical signs were not referred to our clinic. The results emphasise the need for systematic evaluation of anaphylactic reactions during anaesthesia. This can be achieved by the creation of a specialised Allergo-Anaesthesia Clinic, as has been the case in our Department.Sociedade Portuguesa de Alergologia e Imunologia ClínicaRIHUCFaria, ESousa, NGeraldes, LSantos, AChieira, C2012-01-25T15:36:02Z20082008-01-01T00:00:00Zinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleapplication/pdfapplication/pdfhttp://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1270porRev Port Imunoalergol. 2008; 16 (1):73-92info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAP2023-07-11T14:22:32Zoai:rihuc.huc.min-saude.pt:10400.4/1270Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T18:03:48.623360Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Anafilaxia perioperatória em Coimbra: Experiência da consulta de alergia a fármacos
Peri-operative anaphylaxis in Coimbra: the experience of our drug allergy clinic
title Anafilaxia perioperatória em Coimbra: Experiência da consulta de alergia a fármacos
spellingShingle Anafilaxia perioperatória em Coimbra: Experiência da consulta de alergia a fármacos
Faria, E
Anafilaxia
Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos
Cuidados Peri-operatórios
title_short Anafilaxia perioperatória em Coimbra: Experiência da consulta de alergia a fármacos
title_full Anafilaxia perioperatória em Coimbra: Experiência da consulta de alergia a fármacos
title_fullStr Anafilaxia perioperatória em Coimbra: Experiência da consulta de alergia a fármacos
title_full_unstemmed Anafilaxia perioperatória em Coimbra: Experiência da consulta de alergia a fármacos
title_sort Anafilaxia perioperatória em Coimbra: Experiência da consulta de alergia a fármacos
author Faria, E
author_facet Faria, E
Sousa, N
Geraldes, L
Santos, A
Chieira, C
author_role author
author2 Sousa, N
Geraldes, L
Santos, A
Chieira, C
author2_role author
author
author
author
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv RIHUC
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Faria, E
Sousa, N
Geraldes, L
Santos, A
Chieira, C
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Anafilaxia
Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos
Cuidados Peri-operatórios
topic Anafilaxia
Hipersensibilidade a Medicamentos
Cuidados Peri-operatórios
description Background: The incidence of peri-operative anaphylactic reactions ranges from 1:10,000 to 1:20,000. It is crucial to identify the risk factors, the trigger agent and to fi nd adequate alternatives. Aims: To characterise patients with peri-operative anaphylactic reactions. Methods: We performed a retrospective study of patients with suspected adverse peri-operative reactions to anaesthetic drugs, observed in a Drug Allergy Outpatients Clinic from 1994 to 2005. Anaphylaxis was diagnosed based on the clinical history and skin tests to latex, neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBA), hypnotics, opioids and antibiotics. Specifi c IgE to latex was performed in patients with positive skin-prick-tests. Results: We evaluated the clinical charts of 45 patients with adverse peri-operative reactions, 39 of whom were female. Anaphylaxis was diagnosed in 16 patients (35.6%), 15 females, mean age 36.3 years. The remaining patients had non-anaphylactic (28.8%) or not well-characterised reactions (35.6%). In terms of severity, 50% presented grade III and 50% grade IV anaphylaxis. Skin-prick-tests were positive to latex in three patients and negative to all anaesthetic drugs. Intradermal skin tests were positive in 10 out of 16 patients with anaphylactic reactions: 10 to NMBA [atracurium (n = 8), vecuronium (n = 4), suxamethonium (n = 4) and pancuronium (n = 2)], one to fentanyl, one to thiopental and one to cefuroxime. In three cases, the culprit agent was not identifi ed. In four patients, at least one alternative NMBA, with no skin test reactivity, was found. Of these four patients, two underwent further surgical procedures without adverse reactions. Five patients had previously had two or more anaesthetic procedures and four had presented adverse reactions in prior surgeries. Conclusions: In our study the most common causes of anaphylaxis were NMBAs (62.5%) and latex (18.7%), in line with that described in the literature. In 81% of patients with anaphylactic reactions, skin tests were positive to at least one anaesthetic drug or to latex. A high incidence of severe anaphylaxis was found, probably because cases with less severe clinical signs were not referred to our clinic. The results emphasise the need for systematic evaluation of anaphylactic reactions during anaesthesia. This can be achieved by the creation of a specialised Allergo-Anaesthesia Clinic, as has been the case in our Department.
publishDate 2008
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2008
2008-01-01T00:00:00Z
2012-01-25T15:36:02Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv http://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1270
url http://hdl.handle.net/10400.4/1270
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv Rev Port Imunoalergol. 2008; 16 (1):73-92
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Portuguesa de Alergologia e Imunologia Clínica
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Sociedade Portuguesa de Alergologia e Imunologia Clínica
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron:RCAAP
instname_str Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
instacron_str RCAAP
institution RCAAP
reponame_str Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
collection Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1817551797124857856