Epidemiology of hymenoptera allergy

Charpin, D; Birnbaum, J.; Vervloët, D.

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2222.1994.tb02736.x

Cited by 85 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In agreement with previous reports [30, 31], SARs occurred more frequently during the maintenance phase in patients with the HB venom preparation than in those receiving the YJ preparation (Table 3). In the maintenance phase, the ADRs were as follows: group A 8/810 (ADR/injections) (0.99%); group B 11/750 (1.46%); group C 12/440 (2.7%); P = 0.035; A versus C, P = 0.02; B versus C, ( P = 0.03).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hymenoptera Venom Immunotherapy: Tolerance and Efficacy of an Ultrarush Protocol versus a Rush and a Slow Conventional Protocol

Florio

Giuliano²,

Oricchio³

et al. 2012

Journal of Allergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and Objective. Various venom immunotherapy (VIT) protocols are available for Hymenoptera allergy. Although adverse reactions (ADRs) to VIT are widely reported, controlled trials are still needed. We conducted a randomized prospective study to evaluate ADRs and the efficacy of three VIT regimens. Methods. 76 patients with Hymenoptera allergy, aged 16–76 years, were randomized to receive an ultrarush protocol (group A: 27 patients), a rush protocol (group B: 25), or a slow protocol (group C: 24). Aqueous venom extract was used in incremental phase and an adsorbed depot in maintenance phase. ADRs and accidental Hymenoptera stings during VIT were used to evaluate efficacy. Results. During incremental treatment, ADRs occurred in 1.99%, 3.7%, and 3.9% of patients in groups A, B, and C, and in 0.99%, 1.46%, and 2.7%, respectively, during maintenance. ADRs were significantly fewer in group A (incremental + maintenance phase) than in group C (1.29% versus 3.2%; P = 0.013). Reactions to accidental Hymenoptera stings did not differ among groups (1.1%, 1.2%, and 1.1%). Conclusion. Ultrarush was as effective as the rush and slow protocols and was associated with a low incidence of reactions to stings. This study indicates that ultrarush VIT is a valid therapeutic option for Hymenoptera allergy.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 93%

“…In our study, during the maintenance phase, in agreement with previous reports [30], ADRs occurred more frequently in our patients treated with the HB venom preparation than in those receiving the YJ preparation. We previously found that ultrarush VIT rapidly decreased ICAM-1 levels in patients with Hymenoptera allergy [43].…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 93%

Hymenoptera Venom Immunotherapy: Tolerance and Efficacy of an Ultrarush Protocol versus a Rush and a Slow Conventional Protocol

Florio

Giuliano²,

Oricchio³

et al. 2012

Journal of Allergy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Swelling, pruritus, and pain are the most relevant symptoms after insect bites/stings 1. Insects inject a pruritic and/or pain-inducing substance through the epidermis into the dermis with their saliva.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The use of concentrated heat after insect bites/stings as an alternative to reduce swelling, pain, and pruritus: an open cohort-study at German beaches and bathing-lakes

Müller¹,

Großjohann²,

Fischer³

2011

CCID

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundSwelling, pain, and pruritus are the most relevant symptoms after insect bites/stings. Glucocorticoids and antihistamines are well established in insect sting treatment. Bite Away® is a CE-certified medical device of class 2A (noninvasive device intended for administration to the body, which exchanges energy with the patient in a therapeutic manner) to reduce swelling, pruritus, and pain after insect bites/stings via non-invasive administration of concentrated heat to the skin. We therefore performed a prospective, non-interventional, single-arm cohort study with 146 volunteers using the visual analog scale (VAS) for insect bites/stings to study the reduction of swelling, pruritus, and pain. Demographic data, time from insect sting to treatment, number and duration of administrations of concentrated heat, relevant symptoms, and the development of a VAS score of swelling, pruritus, and pain on baseline, after 2, 5, and 10 minutes after administration, were registered.ResultsIn total 146 subjects with a mean age of 29.4 ± 20.7 years (range 2–81) were enrolled in the study. Ninety-three (63.7%) of the subjects were stung by wasps, 33 (22.6%) of the subjects were bitten by mosquitoes, and eight suffered bee stings (5.3%). VAS score swelling decreased with statistical significance after the use of Bite Away® from 4 before treatment to 2 and 1 after 2–5 and 10 minutes, respectively. VAS pain score was 6 before treatment, 2 after 2 minutes, 1 after 5 minutes, and 0 after 10 minutes (median). VAS pruritus score was only available for 52 (35.2%) of the patients. The score decreased from 5 before treatment, to 2 after 2 minutes, and 0 after 5 and 10 minutes.ConclusionsLocally administrated concentrated heat leads to fast amelioration of symptoms. Usually an absence of symptoms is noticeable 10 minutes after administration. Pain reduction is the dominant effect. Compared with alternatives of pruritus and pain treatment after insect bites/stings, Bite Away® seems to be the fastest treatment option available.

show abstract

“…Following a sting, sensitized individuals, apart from extensive and persistent local reaction, occasionally develop severe systemic response including anaphylactic shock which may be fatal [2]. It is estimated that up to 5% of individuals stung by an insect may develop anaphylactic reactions [3, 4]. There are several professions imposing a higher risk of exposure: pastry cookers, forestry workers and beekeepers.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Analysis of Safety, Risk Factors and Pretreatment Methods during Rush Hymenoptera Venom Immunotherapy

Górska

Chełmińska

Krzemieniecki

et al. 2008

Int Arch Allergy Immunol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: The safety profile of venom immunotherapy is a relevant issue. We evaluated the frequency of severe adverse events (SAE), associated risk factors, retrospective comparison of pretreatment protocols including solely H₁ receptor blockers and a combination of H₁ and H₂ receptor blockers during rush Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy. Methods: The study group comprised 118 patients. The treatment was initiated according to a 5-day rush protocol with the use of standardized venom allergens of either wasp or honeybee. Results: During the rush induction, side effects occurred in 18 patients (15.2%), whereas SAE were present in 7 patients (5.9%). Twelve out of 18 (66.6%) developed anaphylactic reactions on the fourth day of the rush protocol, with the majority of cases at a dose of 40 or 60 µg of the venom extract (p = 0.001). The frequency of SAE was also significantly higher on the fourth day than thereafter (p = 0.0001) as well as in patients allergic to bee venom (p = 0.049). All systemic side effects were more frequent in women (p = 0.0065). However, this relation was not true when SAE were consider (p = 0.11). A higher percentage of SAE was observed in the subjects pretreated with both H₁ and H₂ receptor antagonists than in those pretreated with H₁ blocker only (8.8 vs. 4.1%); however, the difference was not significant. Conclusions: Considerable severity of allergic adverse events requires particular attention to patients allergic to bee venom and during rush phase, especially when rapidly increasing doses are administered. Pretreatment with H₂ blockers is debatable and warrants further investigation.

show abstract

Epidemiology of hymenoptera allergy

Cited by 85 publications

References 34 publications

Hymenoptera Venom Immunotherapy: Tolerance and Efficacy of an Ultrarush Protocol versus a Rush and a Slow Conventional Protocol

Hymenoptera Venom Immunotherapy: Tolerance and Efficacy of an Ultrarush Protocol versus a Rush and a Slow Conventional Protocol

The use of concentrated heat after insect bites/stings as an alternative to reduce swelling, pain, and pruritus: an open cohort-study at German beaches and bathing-lakes

Analysis of Safety, Risk Factors and Pretreatment Methods during Rush Hymenoptera Venom Immunotherapy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About