Effect of mycotoxins onin vitro movement of tracheal cilia from one-day-old chicks

Z. Jesenská,D. Bernát

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02906813

Abstract:

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

Epinephrine autoinjectors for individuals with food allergy: Who, how many, and when to use

Julie Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2500/jfa.2024.6.240004

2024-07-01

Abstract:Background: Anaphylaxis is a serious allergic reaction that is effectively treated with epinephrine. Epinephrine autoinjectors are devices that contain fixed doses of medication that can be carried by patients at risk for anaphylaxis so that ready access to first line medication is available outside the medical setting. Methods: This review will discuss recent studies evaluating patient characteristics to consider when prescribing epinephrine autoinjectors. Results: Decisions regarding who should be prescribed epinephrine autoinjectors will depend on the type of allergy, as well as co-morbidities and other risk factors that can increase a patient's risk for poor outcomes. Conclusion: Shared decision-making is essential when developing guidance regarding post-epinephrine management. Regular education during routine follow-up visits can reinforce knowledge and skills for managing food allergy reactions.
Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evidence of adrenaline administered via auto-injector for anaphylactic reactions: A review of literature

James Moss,Yogini Jani,Brian Edwards,Stephen Tomlin,Asia N Rashed

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.14438

Abstract:Anaphylaxis is a severe allergic reaction that can lead to death if not treated quickly. Adrenaline (epinephrine) is the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis and its prompt administration is vital to reduce mortality. Following a number of high-profile cases, serious concerns have been raised, both about the optimal dose of intramuscular adrenaline via an auto-injector and the correct needle length to ensure maximal penetration every time. To date, the public data are sparse on the pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics of adrenaline administered via an auto-injector. The limited available literature showed a huge variation in the plasma concentrations of adrenaline administered through an auto-injector, as well as variations in the auto-injector needle length. Hence, delivering an effective dose during an anaphylaxis remains a challenge for both patients and healthcare professionals. Collaborative work between pharmacokinetics-pharmacodynamics experts, clinical triallists and licence holders is imperative to address this gap in evidence so that we can improve outcomes of anaphylaxis. In addition, we advise inclusion of expertise of human factors in usability studies given the necessity of carer or self-administration in the uniquely stressful nature of anaphylaxis.
Investigation of the underuse of adrenaline (epinephrine) and prognosis among patients with anaphylaxis at emergency department admission

Yen-Yue Lin,Hsin-An Chang,Yung-Hsi Kao,Chih-Pin Chuu,Wen-Fang Chiang,Ya-Chieh Chang,Yuan-Kuei Li,Chi-Ming Chu,Jenq-Shyong Chan,Po-Jen Hsiao

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1163817

IF: 3.9

2023-07-07

Frontiers in Medicine

Abstract:Background Anaphylaxis is a potentially fatal condition; in severe cases of anaphylaxis, the cardiovascular system is often heavily involved. Adrenaline (epinephrine) is a cornerstone of the initial treatment of anaphylaxis. The use of epinephrine remains below expectations in clinical practice. Whether the underuse of epinephrine affects the prognosis of patients with anaphylaxis is still unclear. Materials and methods This retrospective study included patients with anaphylaxis between 2011 and 2020 who were admitted to an emergency department (ED) in Taiwan. All patients were divided into two groups based on the use of epinephrine (or not), and we compared the demographic characteristics, allergens, clinical manifestations, management, and patient outcomes. Results We reviewed the records of 314 subjects (216 males, 98 females; mean age: 52.78 ± 16.02 years) who visited our ED due to anaphylaxis; 107 (34.1%) and 207 (65.9%) patients were categorized into the epinephrine use group and the non-epinephrine use group, respectively. Arrival via ambulance ( p = 0.019), hypotension ( p = 0.002), airway compromise ( p < 0.001) and altered consciousness ( p < 0.001) were the deciding factors for epinephrine use among anaphylactic patients in the ED. The epinephrine use group had higher rates of other inotropic agent usage and fluid challenge. More than 90% of patients received bed rest, steroids, antihistamines, and monitoring. The epinephrine use group had a longer ED length of stay (387.64 ± 374.71 vs. 313.06 ± 238.99 min, p = 0.03) and a greater need of hospitalization. Among all severe symptoms, hypotension was the most tolerated decision factor for not using epinephrine. In this retrospective analysis, some patients with serious anaphylaxis did not experience adverse outcomes or death even without the use of epinephrine at ED admission. Emergent care focuses first on the airway, breathing, and circulation (ABC) and may compensate for the underusage of epinephrine. This could be the reason why epinephrine was underused among patients with anaphylaxis in the ED. Conclusion In summary, early ABC management continues to play an important role in treating patients with severe anaphylaxis, even when epinephrine is not immediately available in clinical scenarios.

medicine, general & internal
Knowledge gaps in the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis

Dana V Wallace

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anai.2023.05.010

Abstract:Knowledge gaps in the diagnosis and treatment of anaphylaxis impede the clinician's ability to effectively manage patients with anaphylaxis. This review will emphasize the lack of a global consensus on defining and determining the severity of anaphylaxis; the need for validating biomarkers used for diagnosing anaphylaxis; and data collection deficiencies. Perioperative anaphylaxis has a wide differential diagnosis, often requires treatment beyond epinephrine, and poses a challenge for the clinician in identifying the responsible trigger(s) and in preventing future reactions. Consensus-derived definitions and determination of risk factors for biphasic, refractory, and persistent anaphylaxis are needed, recognizing that these often affect the emergency department observation time after recovery from initial anaphylaxis. Knowledge gaps exist in the use of epinephrine, including route of administration, dosage, needle length, and ideal timing for administration. Consensus is needed on when and how many epinephrine autoinjectors to prescribe and how to prevent patient underuse and accidental injury. The role of antihistamines and corticosteroids in the prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis requires consensus and additional research. A consensus-derived algorithm for management of idiopathic anaphylaxis is needed. The role of beta-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in the incidence, severity, and treatment of anaphylaxis remains unanswered. Rapid recognition and treatment of anaphylaxis in the community needs improvement. The article will conclude with exploring the recommended components of both a patient-specific and generic anaphylaxis emergency plan, including when to activate emergency medical services, all of which are paramount to improving patient outcomes.
Management of Refractory Anaphylaxis: An Overview of Current Guidelines

Guillaume Pouessel,Timothy E. Dribin,Charles Tacquard,Luciana Kase Tanno,Victoria Cardona,Margitta Worm,Antoine Deschildre,Antonella Muraro,Lene H. Garvey,Paul J. Turner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14514

2024-06-14

Clinical & Experimental Allergy

Abstract:In this review, we compare different refractory anaphylaxis (RA) management guidelines focusing on cardiovascular involvement and best practice recommendations, discuss postulated pathogenic mechanisms underlining RA and highlight knowledge gaps and research priorities. There is a paucity of data supporting existing management guidelines. Therapeutic recommendations include the need for the timely administration of appropriate doses of aggressive fluid resuscitation and intravenous (IV) adrenaline in RA. The preferred second‐line vasopressor (noradrenaline, vasopressin, metaraminol and dopamine) is unknown. Most guidelines recommend IV glucagon for patients on beta‐blockers, despite a lack of evidence. The use of methylene blue or extracorporeal life support (ECLS) is also suggested as rescue therapy. Despite recent advances in understanding the pathogenesis of anaphylaxis, the factors that lead to a lack of response to the initial adrenaline and thus RA are unclear. Genetic factors, such as deficiency in platelet activating factor‐acetyl hydrolase or hereditary alpha‐tryptasaemia, mastocytosis may modulate reaction severity or response to treatment. Further research into the underlying pathophysiology of RA may help define potential new therapeutic approaches and reduce the morbidity and mortality of anaphylaxis.

immunology,allergy
Management of anaphylaxis after pre-hospital epinephrine use in children with food-induced anaphylaxis

Lauren Perlman,Sofianne Gabrielli,Ann E. Clarke,Luca Delli Colli,Marina Delli Colli,Judy Morris,Jocelyn Gravel,Rodrick Lim,Edmond S. Chan,Ran D. Goldman,Andrew O'Keefe,Jennifer Gerdts,Derek K. Chu,Julia Upton,Elana Hochstadter,Jocelyn Moisan,Adam Bretholz,Christine McCusker,Xun Zhang,Jennifer L.P. Protudjer,Elissa M. Abrams,Elinor Simons,Moshe Ben-Shoshan

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anai.2024.09.010

2024-10-05

Abstract:Background Previous guidelines recommend prompt epinephrine administration, followed by observation in the emergency department (ED). The need for transfer in all cases of anaphylaxis has recently been challenged. Objective To evaluate the need for additional ED treatment among children with anaphylaxis who received prehospital epinephrine. Methods Between 2011 and 2023, data were collected on symptoms, triggers, comorbidities, and prehospital and in-hospital management from children (<18 years) with food-induced anaphylaxis who received at least 1 dose of prehospital epinephrine presenting at 7 pediatric EDs. Multivariable logistic regression assessed factors associated with the use of 2 or more prehospital epinephrine autoinjectors (EAIs), epinephrine use in the ED, and hospital admission. Results Of the 1127 children (mean 8.1 ± 5.3 years; 60.6% male sex) with food-induced anaphylaxis who used at least 1 EAI prehospital, the most common trigger was peanuts (25.3%). There were 209 (18.5%) children who received additional epinephrine in the ED, most of whom (88.0%) received 1 dose. A total of 30 (2.7%) patients were admitted to hospital. Among all patients, severe reactions (cardiovascular instability/cyanosis/loss of consciousness) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.22; 95% CI 1.12-1.33) and reactions to tree nuts (aOR 1.09; 95% CI 1.03-1.16) were associated with increased odds of in-hospital epinephrine use. Prehospital inhaled β-agonists (aOR 1.08; 95% CI 1.01-1.16) use and severe reactions (aOR 1.13; 95% CI 1.05-1.22) were associated with the use of 2 or more EAI prehospital. Conclusion A minority of anaphylaxis cases that used prehospital EAIs required additional treatment, supporting that shared decision making about transfer to ED works for most patients.

immunology,allergy
Tryptase in drug-induced anaphylaxis: the need for acute and baseline values

Moïse Michel,Delphine Giusti,Caroline Klingebiel,Joana Vitte

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/ACI.0000000000001012

2024-10-01

Abstract:Purpose of review: The purpose of this narrative review was to summarize data and official recommendations purporting to paired tryptase determination in patients experiencing drug-induced anaphylaxis, published between January 1, 2023 and June 1, 2024. Recent findings: Three main lines of evidence obtained through paired acute and baseline tryptase determination were identified: diagnostic criterion for hypersensitivity reactions involving systemic mast cell activation; differential diagnostic criterion for hypersensitivity reactions involving other mechanisms of immediate reactions; and added value of acute and baseline tryptase levels for personalized management following drug-induced anaphylaxis: cause, risk of recurrence, underlying mast cell conditions including hereditary α-tryptasemia, familial clusters. Summary: The implementation of existing guidelines which consensually recommend paired tryptase measurement is a persistent unmet need hampering optimal diagnosis of drug-induced anaphylaxis and patient management. Another major unmet need is the lack of standardized recommendations for hereditary α-tryptasemia testing and counselling. Progress in this field is seen at a rapid pace, requiring significant efforts of continued medical education for practicing clinicians and laboratory specialists worldwide.
A Health Economic Analysis of Non-injectable Epinephrine Compared with Intramuscular Epinephrine

Marcus S Shaker,John Oppenheimer,Nicholas L. Rider,David BK Golden,Aikaterini Anagnostou,Matthew Greenhawt

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anai.2024.11.025

2024-12-05

Abstract:Background Non-injectable epinephrine to treat allergic reactions addresses an unmet need. Intranasal epinephrine is approved and a sublingual form is under development. Inhaled epinephrine is poorly studied for anaphylaxis. These forms have unknown cost-effectiveness. Objective The aim of this research was to evaluate cost-effectiveness of commercially available non-injectable epinephrine compared with intramuscular epinephrine for treatment of anaphylaxis. Methods Markov cohort analyses evaluated the cost-effectiveness of non-injectable epinephrine forms. The base-case assumed exaggerated anaphylaxis fatality rates (50-fold increase) for using inhaled epinephrine given low certainty evidence in anaphylaxis, and deliberately reduced fatality risk for nasal or sublingual forms (10-fold reduction) theorizing higher adherence and early use during an allergic reaction. Results In the base-case scenario, assuming a 10-fold decreased risk in peanut allergy fatality associated with intranasal or sublingual epinephrine treatment for a severe allergic reaction (net monetary benefit [NMB] 83,748/QALY), but only at a marginal annual cost of 17,900/QALY) vs. inhaled epinephrine (NMB, 100,000/QALY]) if associated fatality risk fell below 2.5-fold. Substituting a single non-injectable form of epinephrine for a second injectable device (in patients prescribed two autoinjectors already) would be cost-effective; however, adding a supplemental non-injectable device was not cost-effective, even assuming a 10-fold risk reduction with multiple device carriage (ICER $858,462). Conclusion Non-injectable routes of epinephrine can be cost-effective options provided fatality risk is not significantly elevated. Carriage of redundant epinephrine autoinjectors with non-injectable forms is not cost-effective if associated with excess cost of redundant device packs.

immunology,allergy
Use of Epinephrine in Patients with Drug-Induced Anaphylaxis: an Analysis of the Beijing Pharmacovigilance Database

Tiansheng Wang,Xiang Ma,Yan Xing,Shusen Sun,Hua Zhang,Til Strumer,Bin Wang,Xiaotong Li,Huilin Tang,Ligong Jiao,Suodi Zhai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1159/000475498

2017-01-01

International Archives of Allergy and Immunology

Abstract:Background: Few studies assessing the use of epinephrine in drug-induced anaphylaxis (DIA) in the hospital setting are available. We utilized the Beijing Pharmacovigilance Database (BPD) to evaluate the appropriateness of epinephrine for DIA management. Methods: DIA cases collected in the BPD from January 2004 to December 2014 were adjudicated and analyzed for demographics, causative drugs, clinical signs, outcomes, initial treatment, route, dosing, and cardiovascular adverse events (CAE) of epinephrine. Results: DIA was primarily caused by antibiotics (38.4%), radiocontrast agents (11.9%), traditional Chinese medicine injections (10.9%), and chemotherapeutic drugs (10.3%). Only 708 (59.5%) patients received epinephrine treatment. Patients who received epinephrine were more likely to experience wheezing (p < 0.001) and respiratory arrest (p < 0.001). Among 518 patients with a complete record of the epinephrine administration route, the percentage of patients receiving it by intramuscular (IM) injection, subcutaneous (SC) injection, intravenous (IV) bolus injection, or IV continuous infusion was 16.9, 31.5, 43.5, and 8.1%, respectively. Among the 427 patients with a record of both the administration route and the dosing, an overdose was more likely with IV bolus (94.1%) in contrast to IM injection (56.6%; p < 0.001) or SC injection (43.7%; p < 0.001). Among the patients analyzed for CAE (n = 349), 17 patients accounted for 19 CAE, and 13 (76.5%) of these patients were overdosed with epinephrine. Conclusion: Underuse, inappropriate IV bolus use, and overdosing were the 3 major problems with epinephrine use in DIA in China. Educational training for health care professionals on the appropriate use of epinephrine in managing anaphylactic reactions is suggested.
Global disparities in availability of epinephrine auto-injectors

Luciana Kase Tanno,Margitta Worm,Motohiro Ebisawa,Ignacio J Ansotegui,Gianenrico Senna,Stanley Fineman,Mario Geller,Alexei Gonzalez-Estrada,Dianne E Campbell,Agnes Leung,Antonella Muraro,Michael Levin,Jose Antonio Ortega Martell,Marco Caminati,Pavel Kolkhir,Duy Le Pham,Razvigor Darlenski,Ignacio Esteban-Gorgojo,Manuel Rial,Ivana Filipovic,Sergio E Chiarella,Lyda Cuervo-Pardo,Christina Kwong,Cezar Fireth Pozo-Beltran,Tu Hk Trinh,Paul A Greenberger,Paul J Turner,Bernard Yu-Hor Thong,Bryan Martin,Victoria Cardona,WAO Anaphylaxis Committee and the WAO Junior Members Steering Group

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.waojou.2023.100821

2023-10-20

Abstract:Background: Anaphylaxis is the most severe clinical presentation of acute systemic allergic reactions and can cause death. Given the prevalence of anaphylaxis within healthcare systems, it is a high priority public health issue. However, management of anaphylaxis - both acute and preventative - varies by region. Methods: The World Allergy Organization (WAO) Anaphylaxis Committee and the WAO Junior Members Steering Group undertook a global online survey to evaluate local practice in the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis across regions. Results: Responses were received from WAO members in 66 countries. While intramuscular epinephrine (adrenaline) is first-line treatment for anaphylaxis, some countries continue to recommend alternative routes in contrast to guidelines. Epinephrine auto-injector (EAI) devices, prescribed to individuals at ongoing risk of anaphylaxis in the community setting, are only available in 60% of countries surveyed, mainly in high-income countries. Many countries in South America, Africa/Middle-East and Asian-Pacific regions do not have EAI available, or depend on individual importation. In countries where EAIs are commercially available, national policies regarding the availability of EAIs in public settings are limited to few countries (16%). There is no consensus regarding the time patients should be observed following emergency treatment of anaphylaxis. Conclusion: This survey provides a global snapshot view of the current management of anaphylaxis, and highlights key unmet needs including the global availability of epinephrine for self-injection as a key component of anaphylaxis management.
A Clinical Practice Guideline for the Emergency Management of Anaphylaxis (2020)

Xiaotong Li,Qingbian Ma,Jia Yin,Ya’an Zheng,Rongchang Chen,Yuguo Chen,Tianzuo Li,Yuqin Wang,Kehu Yang,Hongjun Zhang,Yida Tang,Yaolong Chen,Hailong Dong,Qinglong Gu,Daihong Guo,Xuehui Hu,Lixin Xie,Baohua Li,Yuzhen Li,Tongyu Lin,Fang Liu,Zhiqiang Liu,Lanting Lyu,Quanxi Mei,Jie Shao,Huawen Xin,Fan Yang,Hui Yang,Wanhua Yang,Xu Yao,Chunshui Yu,Siyan Zhan,Guoqiang Zhang,Minggui Wang,Zhu Zhu,Baoguo Zhou,Jianqing Gu,Mo Xian,Yuan Lyu,Zhengqian Li,Hangci Zheng,Chang Cui,Shuhua Deng,Chao Huang,Lisha Li,Pengfei Liu,Peng Men,Chunli Shao,Sai Wang,Xiang Ma,Qiang Wang,Suodi Zhai,Qingbian Ma,Jia Yin,Ya’an Zheng,Rongchang Chen,Yuguo Chen,Tianzuo Li,Yuqin Wang,Hongjun Zhang,Hailong Dong,Baohua Li,Fang Liu,Jie Shao,Zhu Zhu,Jianqing Gu,Mo Xian,Yuan Lyu,Lisha Li,Suodi Zhai

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2022.845689

IF: 5.6

2022-03-28

Frontiers in Pharmacology

Abstract:Background: For anaphylaxis, a life-threatening allergic reaction, the incidence rate was presented to have increased from the beginning of the 21st century. Underdiagnosis and undertreatment of anaphylaxis are public health concerns. Objective: This guideline aimed to provide high-quality and evidence-based recommendations for the emergency management of anaphylaxis. Method: The panel of health professionals from fifteen medical areas selected twenty-five clinical questions and formulated the recommendations with the supervision of four methodologists. We collected evidence by conducting systematic literature retrieval and using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results: This guideline made twenty-five recommendations that covered the diagnosis, preparation, emergency treatment, and post-emergency management of anaphylaxis. We recommended the use of a set of adapted diagnostic criteria from the American National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN), and developed a severity grading system that classified anaphylaxis into four grades. We recommended epinephrine as the first-line treatment, with specific doses and routes of administration for different severity of anaphylaxis or different conditions. Proper dosage is critical in the administration of epinephrine, and the monitor is important in the IV administration. Though there was only very low or low-quality evidence supported the use of glucocorticoids and H1 antagonists, we still weakly recommended them as second-line medications. We could not make a well-directed recommendation regarding premedication for preventing anaphylaxis since it is difficult to weigh the concerns and potential effects. Conclusion: For the emergency management of anaphylaxis we conclude that: • NIAID/FAAN diagnostic criteria and the four-tier grading system should be used for the diagnosis • Prompt and proper administration of epinephrine is critical.

pharmacology & pharmacy
Identifying patients at risk of anaphylaxis

George DuToit,Pete Smith,Antonella Muraro,Adam T Fox,Graham Roberts,Johannes Ring,Margitta Worm

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.waojou.2024.100904

2024-06-11

Abstract:Anaphylaxis is an acute, potentially fatal, systemic hypersensitivity reaction that warrants prompt diagnosis and management. It continues to be challenging to anticipate who may be at risk of a severe, life-threatening allergic reaction. Anaphylaxis can be caused by a range of allergens, such as certain foods, medications, latex, insect stings, etc. Cofactors that augment the severity of clinical symptoms and increase the risk of poor outcomes include exercise, stress, infectious diseases, underlying mast cell disease, active allergic disease such as asthma, advanced age, intake of certain medications, history of previous anaphylaxis, and delayed or missed administration of adrenaline. According to the European Anaphylaxis Registry, food is the major elicitor of anaphylaxis, especially eggs, cow milk, and nuts, in children and adolescents. Reaction to insect venom has also been noted in young adulthood. Early recognition of signs and symptoms and prompt treatment are crucial in anaphylaxis management to avoid serious and even fatal outcomes. It is crucial for both individuals and clinicians to identify the cause of anaphylaxis. Biomarkers of anaphylaxis, such as histamine, tryptase, platelet activation factor (PAF), chymase, carboxypeptidase A3, dipeptidyl peptidase I (DPPI), basogranulin, CCL-2, hsa-miR-451a, may be useful in diagnosis and management. The purpose of this review article is to present a comprehensive overview of current evidence and expert opinions regarding the risk factors that predispose individuals to anaphylaxis. Additionally, it provides insights into potential biomarkers and genetic markers for accurate diagnosis and management. This review underscores the significance of expert guidance in enhancing patient outcomes and enabling self-management of anaphylactic episodes.
Outcomes Associated with Prehospital Epinephrine in Adult and Pediatric Anaphylaxis Patients

Andrea L. Hlady,Aliza F. Weinman,Yuedan Zhang,Aidan F. Mullan,Ronna L. Campbell

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anai.2024.08.006

2024-08-19

Abstract:Background Prompt epinephrine administration is important to improve outcomes in anaphylaxis. Objective The objective of our study was to assess the impact of prehospital epinephrine on clinical outcomes of hospital admission, biphasic reactions, and ED length of stay (LOS) in a cohort of ED anaphylaxis patients including both children and adults. Methods We conducted a single-center prospective and retrospective cohort study of anaphylaxis patients from April 2008 to December 2022. Associations between prehospital epinephrine administration with biphasic reactions and ED LOS were assessed with univariable models and the association with ED disposition was assessed with both univariable and multivariable logistic regression. Results A total of 1107 patient visits were included for analysis. The median patient age was 29 (IQR 14-50), 593 (53.6%) patients were female, 366 (33.1%) were under 18 years of age. Patients in the prehospital epinephrine group were also less likely to experience a biphasic reaction (5.4% vs 9.3%; OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.34–0.92) and had a decreased ED LOS (median 4.0 hours vs 4.7 hours). There was no difference in hospital admission between patients with and without prehospital epinephrine in both the univariable (19.5% vs 15.7%; OR 1.30, 95% CI: 0.94–1.79) and multivariable (aOR 1.08, 95% CI: 0.71-1.64) models. Conclusion Prehospital epinephrine administration reduced the odds of a biphasic reaction and decreased ED LOS but did not reduce hospitalization in this cohort of ED anaphylaxis patients. Our findings suggest that timely administration of prehospital epinephrine is associated with improved patient outcomes.

immunology,allergy
The Ability of First Aid Providers to Recognize Anaphylaxis: A Scoping Review

Daniel Meyran,Pascal Cassan,Michael Nemeth,Eunice Singletary,James Raitt,Therese Djarv,Jestin N Carlson

DOI: https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.41547

2023-07-08

Cureus

Abstract:Early recognition of anaphylaxis is critical to early treatment and often occurs in the first aid setting. However, the ability of first aid providers to recognize anaphylaxis is unknown. We sought to examine the evidence regarding first aid providers' ability to recognize anaphylaxis. Our scoping review was performed as part of the International Liaison Committee on Resuscitation (ILCOR) continuous evidence evaluation processes to update the 2020 ILCOR Consensus on Science with Treatment Recommendations. We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane, and the gray literature from 2010 to September 2022. The population included adults and children experiencing anaphylaxis with a description of any specific symptom to a first aid provider. Recognition of anaphylaxis was the primary outcome. Two investigators (DM and PC) reviewed abstracts and extracted and assessed the data. Discrepancies between the reviewers were resolved by discussion and consensus with the ILCOR First Aid Task Force. Out of 957 hits, 17 studies met inclusion criteria: one review and meta-analysis, two experimental studies, and 14 observational studies. We did not identify any studies that directly addressed our PICOST (Population, Intervention, Control, Outcomes, Study Design, and Timeframe) as none were performed in the first aid setting. Articles included individuals who may be first aid providers as patients and parents (n=5), teachers, students or school staff (n=8), caregivers and patients (n= 2) or nannies (n=1). All included studies were conducted in high-income countries. Our scoping review found that signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis were not specific and did not allow for easy identification by the first aid provider. Studies focused on education (n=10) and protocols (n=2) and found that both could have a positive impact on anaphylaxis recognition and management. While we did not identify any clinical studies that directly addressed the ability of first aid providers to identify anaphylaxis, future studies examining education methods and action plans may help improve the identification of anaphylaxis by first aid providers.
Anaphylaxis in Children: Epidemiology, Risk Factors and Management

Katherine Anagnostou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.2174/1573396314666180507115115

Abstract:Background: Anaphylaxis is defined as a serious, generalized or systemic allergic reaction that is rapid in onset and may cause death. It is unpredictable and can be the result of various allergic triggers including food, insect venom and medication. The European Anaphylaxis Registry confirmed food as the major elicitor of anaphylaxis in children, specifically hen's egg, cow's milk and nuts. Objectives: It has been reported that the incidence of anaphylaxis is on the rise. In the US, there is a continued trend of increasing food-induced anaphylaxis hospitalizations among children, which is supported by nationally representative data. Methods: Anaphylaxis can occur both in the home and outdoors and can be life-threatening, however, fatalities are a rare occurrence. A recent systematic review and meta-analysis reported that fatal food anaphylaxis is rarer than accidental death in the general population. Studies of fatal and near-fatal allergic reactions have identified potential risk factors for fatalities and have provided important information that may help minimize future risk. Following confirmation of the relevant allergen trigger, prevention of anaphylaxis is through strict avoidance of the allergen and optimal management of existing co-morbidities. The cornerstone in the successful management of anaphylaxis is early recognition of signs and symptoms and the prompt administration of intramuscular adrenaline. Result and conclusion: Patients and their families need to be well educated on how to manage potential anaphylactic reactions with training in the use of adrenaline auto-injectors and personalized emergency management plans. Healthcare professionals must be familiar with this clinical emergency and able to respond to anaphylaxis in a timely and appropriate manner.
The Need for Required Stock Epinephrine in All Schools: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee

Anne F Russell,Theresa A Bingemann,Abigail Tarr Cooke,Punita Ponda,Michael Pistiner,Tiffany Jean,Anil Nanda,Jennifer Jobrack,Alice E W Hoyt,Michael C Young

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaip.2022.12.047

Abstract:Epinephrine is the first line of treatment for anaphylaxis that can occur outside a medical setting in community environments such as schools. Patients with diagnosed IgE-mediated food allergy at risk of anaphylaxis are prescribed self-injectable epinephrine and given an individualized anaphylaxis action plan. As students, such patients/families provide their school with completed medication forms, a copy of their anaphylaxis plan, and additional student-specific epinephrine. However, students approved to self-carry prescribed self-injectable epinephrine may forget to do so or have other reasons for lacking prescribed epinephrine such as familial inability to fill the prescription due to cost or other access barriers. Undiagnosed students lacking prescribed epinephrine may also experience anaphylaxis at school. The presence of non-student-specific school stock epinephrine allows school nurses and other staff the ability to treat anaphylaxis onsite while awaiting Emergency Medical Services. Notably, not all states legally mandate K-12 schools to stock epinephrine. In states with laws only voluntarily allowing schools to stock epinephrine, it provides the ability to opt-out. Herein, we present a comprehensive review of barriers to school stock epinephrine, related improvement strategies, and workgroup recommendations supporting the need for mandated stock epinephrine in all schools in every state. Proposed solutions include ensuring legal immunity from liability for prescribers; advocacy for legislation to stabilize cost of self-injectable epinephrine; educational initiatives to schools promoting merits and safety of epinephrine and related anaphylaxis training; and partnerships between patient advocacy groups, medical and nursing organizations, public health departments and other health professionals to promote laws and district policies addressing need for stock epinephrine and school nurses to train and supervise school staff.
Adrenaline Auto‐Injectors for Preventing Fatal Anaphylaxis

Marcus Sim,Vibha Sharma,Karen Li,Mary H. Gowland,Tomaz Garcez,Cassandra Shilladay,Richard Pumphrey,Nandinee Patel,Paul J. Turner,Robert J. Boyle

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cea.14565

2024-10-11

Clinical & Experimental Allergy

Abstract:During 35 years of increasing Adrenaline Autoinjector prescribing, there has been no obvious reduction in numbers of fatal anaphylaxis cases. Animal and human studies suggest intravenous adrenaline infusion, with appropriate fluid resuscitation, prevents fatal anaphylaxis. Current Adrenaline Autoinjectors may have little impact on rates of fatal anaphylaxis due to a lack of sustained and sufficient plasma adrenaline concentration. Anaphylaxis affects up to 5% of people during their lifetime. Although anaphylaxis usually resolves without long‐term physical consequences, it can result in anxiety and quality of life impairment. Rarely and unpredictably, community anaphylaxis can cause rapid physiological decompensation and death. Adrenaline (epinephrine) is the cornerstone of anaphylaxis treatment, and provision of adrenaline autoinjectors (AAI) has become a standard of care for people at risk of anaphylaxis in the community. In this article, we explore the effectiveness of AAIs for preventing fatal outcomes in anaphylaxis, using information drawn from animal and human in vivo studies and epidemiology. We find that data support the effectiveness of intravenous adrenaline infusions for reversing physiological features of anaphylaxis, typically at doses from 0.05 to 0.5 μg/kg/min for 1–2 h, or ~ 10 μg/kg total dose. Intramuscular injection of doses approximating 10 μg/kg in humans can result in similar peak plasma adrenaline levels to intravenous infusions, at 100–500 pg/mL. However, these levels are typically short‐lived following intramuscular adrenaline, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic outcomes can be unpredictable. Epidemiological data do not support an association between increasing AAI prescriptions and reduced fatal anaphylaxis, although carriage and activation rates remain low. Taken together, these data suggest that current AAIs have little impact on rates of fatal anaphylaxis, perhaps due to a lack of sustained and sufficient plasma adrenaline concentration. Effects of AAI prescription on quality of life may be variable. There is a need to consider alternatives, which can safely deliver a sustained adrenaline infusion via an appropriate route.

immunology,allergy
Intranasal epinephrine in dogs: Pharmacokinetic and heart rate effects

Kenneth L Dretchen,Zack Mesa,Matthew Robben,Desmond Slade,Scott Hill,Claire Croutch,Kyle Kappeler,Michael Mesa

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/prp2.587

Abstract:Epinephrine is the standard of care for the treatment of severe allergy and anaphylaxis. Epinephrine is most often administered through the intramuscular (IM) route via autoinjector. The current study aimed to evaluate an alternative method of epinephrine treatment through intranasal (IN) delivery in dogs. The pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ), time to reach maximum plasma concentration (Tmax ), and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 90 minutes (AUC0-90 ) were observed after IN epinephrine (2, 3, 4, 5, 10, and 20 mg) and IM epinephrine via autoinjector (0.15 and 0.3 mg) for 90 minutes. Heart rate effects were measured after IN (2 and 5 mg) and IM (0.15 and 0.3 mg) epinephrine administration. IN epinephrine (5 mg) demonstrated significantly greater plasma epinephrine concentration at 1 minute as compared with IM epinephrine (0.3 mg) (1.68 ± 0.65 ng/mL vs 0.21 ± 0.08 ng/mL, P = .03). There were no significant differences in Cmax , Tmax , and AUC0-90 between 2-mg IN and 0.15-mg IM epinephrine or between 5-mg IN and 0.3-mg IM epinephrine. IN epinephrine reduced heart rate increases, as compared to IM epinephrine. IN and IM epinephrine were both well-tolerated. Overall, IN epinephrine demonstrated advantages over IM epinephrine, including the rapid increase in plasma epinephrine and lack of increased heart rate over time.
New Biomarkers in Anaphylaxis (Beyond Tryptase)

P Galvan-Blasco,J Gil-Serrano,A Sala-Cunill

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40521-022-00326-1

Abstract:Purpose of review: The purpose of this review is to provide a better understanding of anaphylaxis pathophysiology and describe the underlying mechanisms, effector cells, and the potential biomarkers involved depending on the anaphylaxis endotypes. Recent findings: New insight into the potential relevance of pathways others than IgE-dependent anaphylaxis has been unraveled, as well as other biomarkers than tryptase, such as the role of platelet activation factor, basogranulin, dipeptidyl peptidase I, CCL-2, and other cytokines. Summary: Gaining knowledge of all the mediators and cellular activation/communication pathways involved in each endotype of anaphylaxis will allow the application of precision medicine in patients with anaphylactic reactions, providing insights to the most appropriate approach in each case and helping to stratify severity and risk prediction.
Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of epinephrine administered using a mobile inhaler

Sebastian Frechen,Ahmed Abbas Suleiman,Ali Mohammad Nejad Sigaroudi,Bertil Wachall,Uwe Fuhr

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dmpk.2015.08.002

Abstract:Inhaled epinephrine is a potential alternative to self-administered intramuscular epinephrine in imminent anaphylactic reactions. The objective was to develop a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model describing exposure and effects on heart rate of inhaled epinephrine. Data from a 4-phase cross-over clinical trial in 9 healthy volunteers including 0.3 mg intramuscular epinephrine, two doses of inhaled epinephrine (4 mg/mL solution administered during [mean] 18 and 25 min, respectively) using a mobile pocket inhaler, and an inhaled placebo were analyzed using mixed-effects modeling. Inhaled epinephrine was available almost immediately and more rapidly than via the intramuscular route (absorption half-live 29 min). Epinephrine plasma concentrations declined rapidly after terminating inhalation (elimination half-life 4.1 min) offering the option to stop exposure in case of adverse events. While the expected maximum concentration was higher for inhaled epinephrine, this was not associated with safety concerns due to only moderate additional hemodynamic effects compared to intramuscular administration. Bioavailability after inhalation (4.7%) was subject to high interindividual and interoccasional variability highlighting that training of inhalation would be essential for patients. The proposed model suggests that the use of a highly concentrated epinephrine solution via inhalation may offer an effective treatment option in anaphylaxis, while efficacy in patients remains to be shown.

Effect of mycotoxins onin vitro movement of tracheal cilia from one-day-old chicks

Epinephrine autoinjectors for individuals with food allergy: Who, how many, and when to use

Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic evidence of adrenaline administered via auto-injector for anaphylactic reactions: A review of literature

Investigation of the underuse of adrenaline (epinephrine) and prognosis among patients with anaphylaxis at emergency department admission

Knowledge gaps in the diagnosis and management of anaphylaxis

Management of Refractory Anaphylaxis: An Overview of Current Guidelines

Management of anaphylaxis after pre-hospital epinephrine use in children with food-induced anaphylaxis

Tryptase in drug-induced anaphylaxis: the need for acute and baseline values

A Health Economic Analysis of Non-injectable Epinephrine Compared with Intramuscular Epinephrine

Use of Epinephrine in Patients with Drug-Induced Anaphylaxis: an Analysis of the Beijing Pharmacovigilance Database

Global disparities in availability of epinephrine auto-injectors

A Clinical Practice Guideline for the Emergency Management of Anaphylaxis (2020)

Identifying patients at risk of anaphylaxis

Outcomes Associated with Prehospital Epinephrine in Adult and Pediatric Anaphylaxis Patients

The Ability of First Aid Providers to Recognize Anaphylaxis: A Scoping Review

Anaphylaxis in Children: Epidemiology, Risk Factors and Management

The Need for Required Stock Epinephrine in All Schools: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee

Adrenaline Auto‐Injectors for Preventing Fatal Anaphylaxis

Intranasal epinephrine in dogs: Pharmacokinetic and heart rate effects

New Biomarkers in Anaphylaxis (Beyond Tryptase)

Population pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of epinephrine administered using a mobile inhaler