Anaphylaxis Review 2015
Anaphylaxis Review 2015
Anaphylaxis Review 2015
REVIEW
v1
Referee Status:
Abstract
Anaphylaxis prevalence has increased within the last few years. This may be
due to a marked increase in allergic sensitization to foods especially in the
pediatric population, as well as to an increase in outdoor recreational habits
and the availability of new biologic medications. Furthermore, guidelines for
the diagnosis of anaphylaxis have been published, thus facilitating the
recognition of this disorder. Diagnosis of anaphylaxis is mainly based on history
and clinical criteria of organ system involvement. The serum tryptase assay is
now commercially available and may be a helpful diagnostic tool in certain
clinical situations involving hypotension, but not in the context of food-induced
anaphylaxis. Treatment of anaphylaxis mainly involves the use of epinephrine
as a first line medication for severe manifestations followed by symptomatic
management of specific symptoms, such as antihistamines for urticaria and
albuterol for wheezing. Although commonly practiced, treatment with systemic
corticosteroids is not supported by evidence-based literature. Observation in a
medical facility for 4-6 hours is recommended to monitor for late phase
reactions, although these rarely occur. Education is an essential component of
management of a patient with a previous history of anaphylaxis, emphasizing
early use of epinephrine and providing a written action plan. Referral to a
board-certified allergist/immunologist is recommended to determine the cause
of the anaphylaxis as well as to rule out other potential conditions. In this
review, our main focus will be on the treatment and prevention of anaphylaxis
while providing our readers with a brief introduction to the diagnosis of
anaphylaxis, its prevalence and its most common causes.
Invited Referees
version 1
published
22 Dec 2015
Reviews channel.
F1000Research
Page 1 of 8
F1000Research
Page 2 of 8
Diagnosis
History: the diagnosis of anaphylaxis relies principally on the
history, including the time course of the event, such as history of
exposure to a particular trigger, the time course between exposure
and development of symptoms, and the evolution of symptoms and
signs over minutes to hours.
Diagnostic criteria: the diagnostic criteria set forth by the National
Institutes of Health (NIH) in 2006 were based on three clinical
scenarios:
First, in the absence of an allergen, anaphylaxis is diagnosed by a
rapid onset (minutes to hours) of a reaction that involves the skin,
mucosal tissue, or both, alongside at least one of the following
symptoms: respiratory compromise, reduced blood pressure, or
symptoms of end organ dysfunction.
Second, after a likely allergen exposure, two or more of the following occur: involvement of the skin or mucosal tissue, respiratory symptoms, decreased blood pressure, and/or gastrointestinal
involvement.
Management
The management of anaphylaxis includes treatment of acute episodes and preventive measures including management of comorbidities, identification and avoidance of specific triggers, and select
instances of immunomodulation.
Acute treatment
The recommendations for acute treatment of anaphylaxis are largely
based on expert opinion and consensus, as there are no randomized
controlled studies for any of the pharmacologic therapies used.
All published guidelines clearly identify epinephrine as the first-line
medication for the treatment of anaphylaxis1,6. Epinephrine 1:1000
(1 mg/mL) at a dose of 0.20.5 mg in adults and 0.01 mg/kg in children up to a maximum of 0.3 mg dosage should be used6. Injection
in a large muscle, usually the lateral thigh, results in better absorption of the medication26. There are currently two commercially
available doses of epinephrine autoinjectors in the United States:
0.15 mg (ideal for a 15 kg body weight) and 0.3 mg (ideal for a
30 kg body weight). In Europe, a third dose of 0.5 mg has been marketed but is not available for use in the US. It is common practice to
prescribe the 0.15 mg dose to children weighing as low as 10 kg and
the 0.3 mg dose to children after they reach a body weight of 24 kg.
The practice parameters allow physicians to use epinephrine every
510 minutes and even at shorter intervals if deemed necessary6. It
is important to remember that patients on oral or even ophthalmic
beta-blockers might not adequately respond to epinephrine27,28. In
these patients, isotonic saline and intravenous glucagon given at a
dose of 15 mg in adults and 2030 g/kg in children, up to a maximum of 1 mg, should be given, followed by an infusion at a rate of
515 g/minute titrated to clinical response2931. Depending on the
setting (healthcare versus at home), intravenous fluids should be
initiated to maintain adequate circulation32,33.
Another important consideration, which is often ignored, is to position the patient in the Trendelenburg position (lying flat on the back
with legs elevated) in order to allow blood flow to the heart and to
prevent the empty ventricle syndrome described by Pumphrey34.
Other supportive measures could be considered as second-line
therapy. These include oxygen use, H1 and H2 antihistamines for
the treatment of hives, and albuterol for the treatment of bronchospasm. We recommend using a non-sedating antihistamine as
opposed to the common practice of prescribing diphenhydramine,
as the sedative effect might obscure possible central nervous system
Page 3 of 8
Prevention
Long-term preventive measures include the recognition and management of risk factors for anaphylaxis in general, as well as measures directed to the specific triggers in particular.
It is important to identify and manage comorbid conditions that
increase the risk of a severe anaphylactic reaction when poorly
controlled. These include asthma, cardiovascular disease, and mastocytosis or mast cell activation syndrome. Furthermore, administration of certain medications such as beta-blockers may interfere
with the therapeutic response to epinephrine as previously mentioned. Young children may not be able to recognize and report
early symptoms of anaphylaxis, leading to a delay in administration
of epinephrine. Adolescents and young adults often display risky
behavior with regards to food avoidance and poor compliance in
carrying the epinephrine autoinjector.
The next section will review preventive measures specific to the
various diagnostic categories of anaphylaxis.
Food-induced anaphylaxis. Avoidance of the confirmed food
trigger requires lifelong vigilance, including education on reading food labels, informing family and friends, and caution while
eating in public establishments. Given the difficulty in implementing complete food avoidance and the resultant negative effect on
quality of life, clear and consistent information should be provided
regarding the specific food triggers. In some patients, food challenges performed in a clinical setting may be necessary to assess
the clinical significance of positive skin tests or serum IgE levels.
Various forms of immunotherapy for food desensitization are currently being investigated, including oral, sublingual, and patch
application4451. Primary prevention of peanut allergy in high-risk
infants with severe eczema and/or egg allergy was recently reported
in a landmark study where early introduction of peanut between
the ages of 4 and 11 months in infants with negative oral peanut
challenge resulted in a rate of peanut allergy of 3% at 5 years of
age compared to 17% in the group of infants who practiced peanut
avoidance, an 86% relative risk reduction in infants with negative
peanut skin tests52.
Page 4 of 8
Conclusions
Anaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening condition. Given its
high prevalence, 25% of the population, physicians of all specialties are likely to be tasked with the recognition and management of
anaphylactic episodes. In this regard, several consensus guidelines,
including the American, European and World Allergy Organization
guidelines, have been published to facilitate this task13. A careful history and specialized testing to identify potential triggers are
paramount in preventing future events. Measurements of mast cell
mediators in biologic fluids can improve the diagnostic accuracy
of anaphylaxis. Epinephrine remains the mainstay of treatment for
acute episodes. Emerging therapies include the use of omalizumab
as well as allergen-specific immunotherapy.
Competing interests
Dr Elias Akl declares no competing interests.
Dr Anne-Marie Irani: Virginia Commonwealth Institute receives
royalties from ThermoFisher for the tryptase assay, which are
shared with the authors spouse.
Grant information
The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting
this work.
F1000 recommended
References
1.
2.
Johansson SG, Bieber T, Dahl R, et al.: Revised nomenclature for allergy for
global use: Report of the Nomenclature Review Committee of the World
Allergy Organization, October 2003. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2004; 113(5): 8326.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
3.
4.
6.
7.
Page 5 of 8
8.
Stevenson DD: Aspirin and NSAID sensitivity. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am.
2004; 24(3): 491505, vii.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
32.
9.
10.
33.
11.
Cox L, Platts-Mills TA, Finegold I, et al.: American Academy of Allergy, Asthma &
Immunology/American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology Joint Task
Force Report on omalizumab-associated anaphylaxis. J Allergy Clin Immunol.
2007; 120(6): 13737.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
34.
Pumphrey RS: Fatal posture in anaphylactic shock. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2003;
112(2): 4512.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
35.
Sheikh A, Ten Broek V, Brown SG, et al.: H1-antihistamines for the treatment of
anaphylaxis: Cochrane systematic review. Allergy. 2007; 62(8): 8307.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
Kemp SF: The post-anaphylaxis dilemma: how long is long enough to observe
a patient after resolution of symptoms? Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2008; 8(1):
458.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
42.
43.
44.
Wang J, Sampson HA: Oral and sublingual immunotherapy for food allergy.
Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol. 2013; 31(3): 198209.
PubMed Abstract | F1000 Recommendation
45.
Burks AW, Wood RA, Jones SM, et al.: Sublingual immunotherapy for
peanut allergy: Long-term follow-up of a randomized multicenter trial. J Allergy
Clin Immunol. 2015; 135(5): 12408.e13.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text | F1000 Recommendation
12.
Golden DB: Insect sting allergy and venom immunotherapy: a model and a
mystery. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2005; 115(3): 43947; quiz 448.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
Lockey RF, Benedict LM, Turkeltaub PC, et al.: Fatalities from immunotherapy
(IT) and skin testing (ST). J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1987; 79(4): 66077.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
18.
Reid MJ, Lockey RF, Turkeltaub PC, et al.: Survey of fatalities from skin testing
and immunotherapy 19851989. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1993; 92(1 Pt 1): 615.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
19.
Lockey RF, Nicoara-Kasti GL, Theodoropoulos DS, et al.: Systemic reactions and
fatalities associated with allergen immunotherapy. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol.
2001; 87(1 Suppl 1): 4755.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
20.
21.
22.
Schwartz LB, Bradford TR, Rouse C, et al.: Development of a new, more sensitive
immunoassay for human tryptase: use in systemic anaphylaxis. J Clin Immunol.
1994; 14(3): 190204.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
23.
46.
24.
Schwartz LB, Metcalfe DD, Miller JS, et al.: Tryptase levels as an indicator of
mast-cell activation in systemic anaphylaxis and mastocytosis. N Engl J Med.
1987; 316(26): 16226.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
47.
Burks AW, Jones SM, Wood RA, et al.: Oral immunotherapy for treatment of
egg allergy in children. N Engl J Med. 2012; 367(3): 23343.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text | F1000 Recommendation
25.
48.
Wood RA, Sampson HA: Oral immunotherapy for the treatment of peanut
allergy: is it ready for prime time? J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2014; 2(1): 978.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
49.
26.
Fleischer DM, Burks AW, Vickery BP, et al.: Sublingual immunotherapy for
peanut allergy: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled multicenter
trial. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2013; 131(1): 11927.e17.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text | F1000 Recommendation
27.
50.
28.
Vander Zanden JA, Valuck RJ, Bunch CL, et al.: Systemic adverse effects of
ophthalmic beta-blockers. Ann Pharmacother. 2001; 35(12): 16337.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
51.
29.
Lang DM, Alpern MB, Visintainer PF, et al.: Increased risk for anaphylactoid
reaction from contrast media in patients on beta-adrenergic blockers or with
asthma. Ann Intern Med. 1991; 115(4): 2706.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
Goldberg MR, Nachshon L, Appel MY, et al.: Efficacy of baked milk oral
immunotherapy in baked milk-reactive allergic patients. J Allergy Clin Immunol.
2015; 136(6): pii: S0091-6749(15)00794-0.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | F1000 Recommendation
52.
30.
Page 6 of 8
53.
Raja AS, Lindsell CJ, Bernstein JA, et al.: The use of penicillin skin testing
to assess the prevalence of penicillin allergy in an emergency department
setting. Ann Emerg Med. 2009; 54(1): 727.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
54.
55.
Romano A, Caubet JC: Antibiotic allergies in children and adults: from clinical
symptoms to skin testing diagnosis. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract. 2014; 2(1): 312.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
56.
57.
68.
Steinke JW, Platts-Mills TA, Commins SP: The alpha-gal story: lessons
learned from connecting the dots. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2015; 135(3): 58996;
quiz 597.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text | F1000 Recommendation
69.
70.
71.
58.
Moffitt JE, Golden DB, Reisman RE, et al.: Stinging insect hypersensitivity:
a practice parameter update. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2004; 114(4): 86986.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | F1000 Recommendation
59.
72.
73.
74.
Ditto AM, Harris KE, Krasnick J, et al.: Idiopathic anaphylaxis: a series of 335
cases. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol. 1996; 77(4): 28591.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | F1000 Recommendation
60.
61.
62.
Metcalfe DD, Schwartz LB: Assessing anaphylactic risk? Consider mast cell
clonality. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2009; 123(3): 6878.
PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
75.
63.
76.
64.
77.
65.
78.
66.
Shadick NA, Liang MH, Partridge AJ, et al.: The natural history of exercise-induced
Page 7 of 8
F1000Research
Page 8 of 8