TY - JOUR
T1 - Drug-Induced Anaphylaxis in Latin American Countries
AU - Latin America Drug Allergy Interest Group
AU - Jares, Edgardo José
AU - Baena-Cagnani, Carlos E.
AU - Sánchez-Borges, Mario
AU - Ensina, Luis Felipe C.
AU - Arias-Cruz, Alfredo
AU - Gómez, Maximiliano
AU - Cuello, Mabel Noemi
AU - Morfin-Maciel, Blanca María
AU - De Falco, Alicia
AU - Barayazarra, Susana
AU - Bernstein, Jonathan A.
AU - Serrano, Carlos
AU - Monsell, Silvana
AU - Schuhl, Juan
AU - Cardona-Villa, Ricardo
AU - Zanacchi, Viviana Andrea
AU - Cherrez, Ivan
AU - Salvatierra, Adolfo
AU - Diez, Susana
AU - Toche, Paola
AU - Díaz, Sandra González
AU - Felix, Mara Morelo Rocha
AU - Zuloaga, Luis Fernando Ramírez
AU - Vinuesa, Miguel
AU - Bissinger, Ingrid
AU - Zuluaga, Luis Fernando Ramírez
AU - Weisz, Adriana
AU - Mendez, Ada Castillo
AU - Mercovich, Gregorio
AU - Piza, Cristina F.S.T.
AU - Castillo, Antonio J.
AU - Alcaraz, Perla
AU - Herrera, Eugenia
AU - Malaman, Maria Fernanda
AU - Mimessi, Galie
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2015 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology.
PY - 2015/9/1
Y1 - 2015/9/1
N2 - Background: Information regarding the clinical features and management of drug-induced anaphylaxis (DIA) in Latin America is lacking. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess implicated medications, demographics, and treatments received for DIA in Latin American patients referred to national specialty centers for evaluation. Method: A database previously used to compile information on drug-induced allergic reactions in 11 Latin American countries was used to identify and characterize patients presenting specifically with a clinical diagnosis of DIA. Information regarding clinical presentation, causative agent(s), diagnostic studies performed, treatment, and contributing factors associated with increased reaction severity was analyzed. Results: There were 1005 patients evaluated for possible drug hypersensitivity reactions during the study interval, and 264 (26.3%) met criteria for DIA. DIA was more frequent in adults and in elderly females (N = 129 [76.6%] and N = 30 [75%], respectively) compared with children and/or adolescents (N = 21 [42.9%], P < .01) Severe DIA was less frequent with underlying asthma (N = 22 vs 35 [38.6% vs 61.4%], P < .05) or atopy (N = 62 vs 71 [43% vs 59%], P < .01). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (N = 178 [57.8%]), beta-lactam antibiotics (N = 44 [14.3%]), and other antibiotics (N = 16 [5.2%]) were the most frequently implicated drug classes. Anaphylaxis was rated as severe in N = 133 (50.4%) and anaphylactic shock (AS) was present in N = 90 (34.1%). Epinephrine was only used in N = 73 (27.6%) overall, but in N = 70 (77.8%) of patients with AS. Conclusion: In Latin American patients referred for evaluation of DIA, NSAIDs and antibiotics were implicated in approximately 80% of cases. Most of these reactions were treated in the emergency department. Epinephrine was administered in only 27.6% of all cases, although more frequently for anaphylactic shock. Dissemination of anaphylaxis guidelines among emergency department physicians should be encouraged to improve management of DIA.
AB - Background: Information regarding the clinical features and management of drug-induced anaphylaxis (DIA) in Latin America is lacking. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess implicated medications, demographics, and treatments received for DIA in Latin American patients referred to national specialty centers for evaluation. Method: A database previously used to compile information on drug-induced allergic reactions in 11 Latin American countries was used to identify and characterize patients presenting specifically with a clinical diagnosis of DIA. Information regarding clinical presentation, causative agent(s), diagnostic studies performed, treatment, and contributing factors associated with increased reaction severity was analyzed. Results: There were 1005 patients evaluated for possible drug hypersensitivity reactions during the study interval, and 264 (26.3%) met criteria for DIA. DIA was more frequent in adults and in elderly females (N = 129 [76.6%] and N = 30 [75%], respectively) compared with children and/or adolescents (N = 21 [42.9%], P < .01) Severe DIA was less frequent with underlying asthma (N = 22 vs 35 [38.6% vs 61.4%], P < .05) or atopy (N = 62 vs 71 [43% vs 59%], P < .01). Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) (N = 178 [57.8%]), beta-lactam antibiotics (N = 44 [14.3%]), and other antibiotics (N = 16 [5.2%]) were the most frequently implicated drug classes. Anaphylaxis was rated as severe in N = 133 (50.4%) and anaphylactic shock (AS) was present in N = 90 (34.1%). Epinephrine was only used in N = 73 (27.6%) overall, but in N = 70 (77.8%) of patients with AS. Conclusion: In Latin American patients referred for evaluation of DIA, NSAIDs and antibiotics were implicated in approximately 80% of cases. Most of these reactions were treated in the emergency department. Epinephrine was administered in only 27.6% of all cases, although more frequently for anaphylactic shock. Dissemination of anaphylaxis guidelines among emergency department physicians should be encouraged to improve management of DIA.
KW - Anaphylaxis
KW - Drug allergy
KW - Epidemiology
KW - Epinephrine
KW - Latin America
UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/84941260311
U2 - 10.1016/j.jaip.2015.05.012
DO - 10.1016/j.jaip.2015.05.012
M3 - Artículo
C2 - 26143020
AN - SCOPUS:84941260311
SN - 2213-2198
VL - 3
SP - 780
EP - 788
JO - Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
JF - Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology: In Practice
IS - 5
ER -