没有证据表明对鸡蛋、大豆或花生过敏的成年人使用异丙酚有禁忌症。

L. L. Asserhøj, H. Mosbech, M. Krøigaard, L. H. Garvey
{"title":"没有证据表明对鸡蛋、大豆或花生过敏的成年人使用异丙酚有禁忌症。","authors":"L. L. Asserhøj, H. Mosbech, M. Krøigaard, L. H. Garvey","doi":"10.1097/01.sa.0000490336.54904.62","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BACKGROUND\nPropofol is thought to be a potential cause of allergic reactions in patients allergic to egg, soy or peanut, since current formulations contain an emulsion that includes egg lecithin and soybean oil. However, other than six case reports lacking in confirmatory evidence of an allergic reaction, there is no evidence linking the two types of allergies. The aim of this study was to examine the frequency of propofol allergy and to investigate if patients with specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) to egg, soy or peanut tolerated propofol.\n\n\nMETHODS\nStudy A examined the frequency of propofol allergy in 273 patients systematically investigated for suspected perioperative allergic reactions. Of these, 153 had been exposed to propofol and underwent skin tests and intravenous provocation. Study B retrospectively investigated propofol exposure and tolerance in 520 adult patients with a positive specific IgE to egg, soy or peanut.\n\n\nRESULTS\nFour of the 153 propofol-exposed patients (2.6%) investigated in study A were diagnosed with propofol allergy. Of these, three tested positive only on intravenous provocation. None of the four had allergic symptoms when eating egg, soy or peanut and none had detectable levels of specific IgE to egg or soy in their serum. In study B we found no signs of allergic reactions towards propofol in 171 retrieved anaesthetic charts from 99 patients with specific IgE to egg, soy or peanut.\n\n\nCONCLUSION\nNo connection between allergy to propofol and allergy to egg, soy or peanut was found. The present practice of choosing alternatives to propofol in patients with this kind of food allergy is not evidence based and should be reconsidered.","PeriodicalId":22104,"journal":{"name":"Survey of Anesthesiology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"98","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"No evidence for contraindications to the use of propofol in adults allergic to egg, soy or peanut†.\",\"authors\":\"L. L. Asserhøj, H. Mosbech, M. Krøigaard, L. H. Garvey\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/01.sa.0000490336.54904.62\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"BACKGROUND\\nPropofol is thought to be a potential cause of allergic reactions in patients allergic to egg, soy or peanut, since current formulations contain an emulsion that includes egg lecithin and soybean oil. However, other than six case reports lacking in confirmatory evidence of an allergic reaction, there is no evidence linking the two types of allergies. The aim of this study was to examine the frequency of propofol allergy and to investigate if patients with specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) to egg, soy or peanut tolerated propofol.\\n\\n\\nMETHODS\\nStudy A examined the frequency of propofol allergy in 273 patients systematically investigated for suspected perioperative allergic reactions. Of these, 153 had been exposed to propofol and underwent skin tests and intravenous provocation. Study B retrospectively investigated propofol exposure and tolerance in 520 adult patients with a positive specific IgE to egg, soy or peanut.\\n\\n\\nRESULTS\\nFour of the 153 propofol-exposed patients (2.6%) investigated in study A were diagnosed with propofol allergy. Of these, three tested positive only on intravenous provocation. None of the four had allergic symptoms when eating egg, soy or peanut and none had detectable levels of specific IgE to egg or soy in their serum. In study B we found no signs of allergic reactions towards propofol in 171 retrieved anaesthetic charts from 99 patients with specific IgE to egg, soy or peanut.\\n\\n\\nCONCLUSION\\nNo connection between allergy to propofol and allergy to egg, soy or peanut was found. The present practice of choosing alternatives to propofol in patients with this kind of food allergy is not evidence based and should be reconsidered.\",\"PeriodicalId\":22104,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Survey of Anesthesiology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"98\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Survey of Anesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sa.0000490336.54904.62\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Survey of Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sa.0000490336.54904.62","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 98

摘要

背景丙泊酚被认为是对鸡蛋、大豆或花生过敏的患者产生过敏反应的潜在原因,因为目前的配方中含有鸡蛋卵磷脂和大豆油的乳剂。然而,除了6例缺乏过敏反应确凿证据的病例报告外,没有证据表明这两种类型的过敏之间存在联系。本研究的目的是检查异丙酚过敏的频率,并调查对鸡蛋、大豆或花生具有特异性免疫球蛋白E (IgE)的患者是否耐受异丙酚。方法研究A系统调查了273例疑似围手术期过敏反应患者的异丙酚过敏发生率。其中153人接触过异丙酚,并接受了皮肤试验和静脉注射刺激。研究B回顾性调查了520例对鸡蛋、大豆或花生特异性IgE阳性的成年患者异丙酚暴露和耐受性。结果A研究中153例丙泊酚暴露患者中有4例(2.6%)诊断为丙泊酚过敏。其中3例仅在静脉注射刺激时检测呈阳性。这四个人在吃鸡蛋、大豆或花生时都没有过敏症状,他们的血清中也没有检测到对鸡蛋或大豆的特定IgE水平。在研究B中,我们从99例对鸡蛋、大豆或花生有特定IgE的患者中检索到171例麻醉图表,没有发现对异丙酚过敏的迹象。结论异丙酚过敏与鸡蛋、大豆、花生过敏无相关性。目前在这类食物过敏患者中选择异丙酚替代品的做法是没有证据基础的,应该重新考虑。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
No evidence for contraindications to the use of propofol in adults allergic to egg, soy or peanut†.
BACKGROUND Propofol is thought to be a potential cause of allergic reactions in patients allergic to egg, soy or peanut, since current formulations contain an emulsion that includes egg lecithin and soybean oil. However, other than six case reports lacking in confirmatory evidence of an allergic reaction, there is no evidence linking the two types of allergies. The aim of this study was to examine the frequency of propofol allergy and to investigate if patients with specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) to egg, soy or peanut tolerated propofol. METHODS Study A examined the frequency of propofol allergy in 273 patients systematically investigated for suspected perioperative allergic reactions. Of these, 153 had been exposed to propofol and underwent skin tests and intravenous provocation. Study B retrospectively investigated propofol exposure and tolerance in 520 adult patients with a positive specific IgE to egg, soy or peanut. RESULTS Four of the 153 propofol-exposed patients (2.6%) investigated in study A were diagnosed with propofol allergy. Of these, three tested positive only on intravenous provocation. None of the four had allergic symptoms when eating egg, soy or peanut and none had detectable levels of specific IgE to egg or soy in their serum. In study B we found no signs of allergic reactions towards propofol in 171 retrieved anaesthetic charts from 99 patients with specific IgE to egg, soy or peanut. CONCLUSION No connection between allergy to propofol and allergy to egg, soy or peanut was found. The present practice of choosing alternatives to propofol in patients with this kind of food allergy is not evidence based and should be reconsidered.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Context is king - obstetric anaesthesia management strategies in limited resource settings. Preoperative Administration of Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme Inhibitors or Angiotensin II Receptor Blockers: Do We Have Enough “VISION” to Stop It? Implementing a Statistical Model for Protamine Titration: Effects on Coagulation in Cardiac Surgical Patients Vasopressin, Norepinephrine, and Vasodilatory Shock After Cardiac Surgery: Another “VASST” Difference? Prospective Double Blind Randomized Placebo-Controlled Clinical Trial of the Pectoral Nerves (Pecs) Block Type II
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1