1
|
Chu AWL, Rayner DG, Chu X, Chen L, Dong AYH, Waserman S, Baker DR, Sheikh J, Moellman J, Lang DM, Ben-Shoshan M, Mathur SK, Beck LA, Khan DA, Oliver ET, Asiniwasis RN, Chan J, Cole EF, Trayes KP, Frazier WT, Runyon L, Wheeler KE, Eftekhari S, Gardner DD, Winders T, Bernstein JA, Saini SS, Chu DK. Topical corticosteroids for hives and itch (urticaria): Systematic review and Bayesian meta-analysis of randomized trials. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2024; 133:437-444.e18. [PMID: 38901542 DOI: 10.1016/j.anai.2024.06.003] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/26/2024] [Revised: 06/02/2024] [Accepted: 06/04/2024] [Indexed: 06/22/2024]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Topical corticosteroids are widely used as a treatment for itch and wheals (urticaria), but their benefits and harms are unclear. OBJECTIVE To systematically synthesize the benefits and harms of topical corticosteroids for the treatment of urticaria. METHODS We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL from database inception to March 23, 2024, for randomized trials comparing topical corticosteroids with placebo for patients with urticaria (either chronic spontaneous or inducible urticaria or acute urticaria elicited from skin/intradermal allergy testing). Paired reviewers independently screened records, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias. Random-effects meta-analyses addressed urticaria severity, itch severity (numeric rating scale; range 0-10; higher is worse), and adverse events. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach informed certainty of evidence ratings. PROSPERO registration: CRD42023455182. RESULTS A total of 19 randomized controlled trials enrolled 379 participants with a median of mean age of 30.1 (range 21.1-44.0) years. Compared with placebo, topical corticosteroids may reduce wheal size (ratio of means 0.47, 95% CI 0.38-0.59; low certainty) and itch severity (mean difference -1.30, 95% CI -5.07 to 2.46; very low certainty). Topical corticosteroids result in little to no difference in overall adverse events (94 fewer patients per 1000, 95% credible intervals 172 fewer to 12 more; high certainty). CONCLUSION Compared with placebo, topical corticosteroids may result in a reduction of wheal size and little to no difference in overall adverse events. Topical corticosteroids may reduce itch severity, but the evidence is very uncertain. Future large, randomized trials addressing the use of topical corticosteroids would further support optimal urticaria management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexandro W L Chu
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Evidence in Allergy Group, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Daniel G Rayner
- Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Xiajing Chu
- Evidence in Allergy Group, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Lina Chen
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Evidence in Allergy Group, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Audrey Y H Dong
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Evidence in Allergy Group, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Susan Waserman
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
| | - Diane R Baker
- Department of Dermatology, Oregon Health & Sciences University, Portland, Oregon
| | - Javed Sheikh
- Department of Clinical Immunology and Allergy, Southern California Permanente Medical Group, Los Angeles, California
| | - Joseph Moellman
- Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio
| | - David M Lang
- Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio
| | - Moshe Ben-Shoshan
- Division of Allergy, Immunology and Dermatology, Department of Pediatrics, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada
| | - Sameer K Mathur
- Division of Allergy, Pulmonary and Critical Care, Department of Medicine, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin
| | - Lisa A Beck
- Department of Dermatology, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, New York
| | - David A Khan
- Division of Allergy and Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Eric T Oliver
- Division of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Rachel N Asiniwasis
- Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, University of Saskatchewan, Regina, Saskatchewan, Canada
| | - Jeffrey Chan
- Emergency Medicine, Southlake Regional Health Centre, Newmarket, Ontario, Canada
| | - Emily F Cole
- Department of Dermatology, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina
| | - Kathryn P Trayes
- Department of Family and Community Medicine, Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Winfred T Frazier
- Department of Family Medicine, UPMC St. Margaret, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Lauren Runyon
- Division of Allergy and Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, Texas
| | - Kathryn E Wheeler
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
| | - Sanaz Eftekhari
- Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America, Arlington, Virginia
| | | | - Tonya Winders
- Global Allergy & Airways Patient Platform, Vienna, Austria
| | - Jonathan A Bernstein
- Division of Rheumatology, Allergy and Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio
| | - Sarbjit S Saini
- Division of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland
| | - Derek K Chu
- Department of Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Evidence in Allergy Group, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence & Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada; The Research Institue of St. Joe's Hamilton, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ugwu N, Cheraghlou S, Antaya RJ, Feng H, Cohen JM. Trends in office visits and treatment for urticaria in children in the United States, 1998-2016. Pediatr Dermatol 2021; 38:1162-1168. [PMID: 34339077 DOI: 10.1111/pde.14726] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES Urticaria is a common condition with an estimated prevalence of up to 23% in the pediatric population. Studies characterizing visits and treatments for urticaria in the pediatric population are unavailable. Understanding visit and treatment trends for urticaria in the pediatric population may help inform care for patients with urticaria. METHODS A total of 108 278 outpatient records from the National Ambulatory Medical Care Survey representing 3.4 billion visits by patients of age 18 and younger were analyzed. This study included the calendar years 1998 through 2016. RESULTS Pediatricians saw the largest proportion of all visits (52.7%). Male and female patients accounted for approximately equal proportions of all visits for urticaria. There was a slight male predominance in visits to pediatricians (53.7%), whereas dermatologists saw female patients more frequently (63.3%). Most visits for urticaria were by non-Hispanic (78.1%) and White (78.2%) patients. H1 antihistamines were the most commonly prescribed treatment (70.3%), whereas topical corticosteroids were prescribed least frequently (4.9%). Topical corticosteroids were most frequently prescribed by dermatologists (7.7%). Non-H1 antihistamine and non-corticosteroid therapy were prescribed in 9.7% of all visits and in 4.5% of visits to pediatricians. Most visits for urticaria were to physicians in metropolitan areas (88.8%). Pediatricians saw the highest number of non-metropolitan area visits (56.3%). CONCLUSIONS H1 antihistamines were the most commonly used therapy (70%), consistent with established treatment guidelines. Male and female pediatric patients present equally often for urticaria, but sex differences were seen with visit frequencies to certain specialties.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Nelson Ugwu
- Department of Dermatology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Shayan Cheraghlou
- Department of Dermatology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Richard J Antaya
- Department of Dermatology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.,Department of Pediatrics, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| | - Hao Feng
- Department of Dermatology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, USA
| | - Jeffrey M Cohen
- Department of Dermatology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Kulthanan K, Ungprasert P, Tuchinda P, Chularojanamontri L, Charoenpipatsin N, Maurer M. Delayed Pressure Urticaria: A Systematic Review of Treatment Options. THE JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY-IN PRACTICE 2020; 8:2035-2049.e5. [PMID: 32179196 DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2020.03.004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/03/2019] [Revised: 02/10/2020] [Accepted: 03/03/2020] [Indexed: 12/22/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Delayed pressure urticaria (DPU) is characterized by recurrent erythematous and often painful swelling after the skin is exposed to sustained pressure. Treatment is challenging. Antihistamines, the first-line and only approved treatment, are often not effective. OBJECTIVE To systematically review the treatment options for DPU. METHOD A literature search of electronic databases for all relevant articles published till April 29, 2019, was conducted using the search terms "delayed pressure urticaria" and "pressure urticaria." This systematic review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses recommendations. RESULTS Twenty-one studies (8 randomized controlled trials [RCTs], 10 retrospective cohort studies, and 3 open-label prospective studies) were included. Second-generation H1 antihistamines (sgAHs) were effective in 3 RCTs. The combination of an sgAH and montelukast (2 RCTs) or an sgAH and theophylline (1 non-RCT) was more effective than the sgAH alone. The disease improved with omalizumab (4 non-RCTs), sulphones (3 non-RCTs), oral prednisolone (1 RCT and 2 non-RCTs), intravenous immunoglobulin (1 non-RCT), and gluten-free diet (1 non-RCT). There are no studies on updosing of antihistamines over standard dosage in DPU. CONCLUSIONS Overall, the quality of studies on DPU is low. Because of the lack of other evidence, antihistamines remain the first-line therapy. Updosing of sgAHs could be considered in patients with uncontrolled symptoms on the basis of the extrapolation of evidence from chronic spontaneous urticaria, even though there is no evidence of its efficacy over standard dosage. Addition of montelukast may be considered. Omalizumab or sulphones may be used in treatment-resistant patients. High-quality DPU studies should be conducted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Kanokvalai Kulthanan
- Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Patompong Ungprasert
- Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Department of Research and Development, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Papapit Tuchinda
- Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Leena Chularojanamontri
- Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Norramon Charoenpipatsin
- Department of Dermatology, Faculty of Medicine Siriraj Hospital, Mahidol University, Bangkok, Thailand
| | - Marcus Maurer
- Dermatological Allergology, Allergie-Centrum-Charité, Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Mehta A, Godse K, Patil S, Nadkarni N, Gautam M. Treatment of Refractory Chronic Urticaria. Indian J Dermatol 2015; 60:230-7. [PMID: 26120147 PMCID: PMC4458932 DOI: 10.4103/0019-5154.156325] [Citation(s) in RCA: 5] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
Chronic spontaneous urticaria is a distressing disease encountered frequently in clinical practice. The current mainstay of therapy is the use of second-generation, non-sedating antihistamines. However, in patients who do not respond satisfactorily to these agents, a variety of other drugs are used. This article examines the available literature for frequently used agents including systemic corticosteroids, leukotriene receptor antagonists, dapsone, sulfasalazine, hydroxychloroquine, H2 antagonists, methotrexate, cyclosporine A, omalizumab, autologous serum therapy, and mycophenolate mofetil, with an additional focus on publications in Indian literature.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Aayushi Mehta
- Department of Dermatology, Dr. DY Patil Medical College and Hospital, Nerul, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Kiran Godse
- Department of Dermatology, Dr. DY Patil Medical College and Hospital, Nerul, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Sharmila Patil
- Department of Dermatology, Dr. DY Patil Medical College and Hospital, Nerul, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Nitin Nadkarni
- Department of Dermatology, Dr. DY Patil Medical College and Hospital, Nerul, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| | - Manjyot Gautam
- Department of Dermatology, Dr. DY Patil Medical College and Hospital, Nerul, Navi Mumbai, Maharashtra, India
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Bernstein JA, Lang DM, Khan DA, Craig T, Dreyfus D, Hsieh F, Sheikh J, Weldon D, Zuraw B, Bernstein DI, Blessing-Moore J, Cox L, Nicklas RA, Oppenheimer J, Portnoy JM, Randolph CR, Schuller DE, Spector SL, Tilles SA, Wallace D. The diagnosis and management of acute and chronic urticaria: 2014 update. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2014; 133:1270-7. [DOI: 10.1016/j.jaci.2014.02.036] [Citation(s) in RCA: 320] [Impact Index Per Article: 32.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/26/2013] [Revised: 02/10/2014] [Accepted: 02/12/2014] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
|
6
|
Contemporary approaches to the diagnosis and management of physical urticaria. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2013; 111:235-41. [PMID: 24054356 DOI: 10.1016/j.anai.2013.07.031] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/06/2013] [Revised: 07/08/2013] [Accepted: 07/26/2013] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
|
7
|
Dortas Jr SD, Valle SOR, Pires AHS, Guimarães PV, Jorge AS. Urticária de pressão tardia com manifestações sistêmicas: relato de caso. An Bras Dermatol 2009; 84:671-4. [PMID: 20191182 DOI: 10.1590/s0365-05962009000600016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/01/2008] [Accepted: 07/01/2009] [Indexed: 11/21/2022] Open
Abstract
A Urticária de Pressão Tardia é considerada uma doença rara, cujo quadro clínico é diferente da urticária clássica e pode envolver manifestações sistêmicas. Sendo assim,o diagnóstico é pouco frequente, até mesmo pelos especialistas. Neste artigo, apresentamos uma paciente, com história típica de lesões desencadeadas por pressão e que, por apresentar febre e leucocitose, foi internada para investigação de quadro infeccioso.
Collapse
|
8
|
Cassano N, Mastrandrea V, Vestita M, Vena GA. An overview of delayed pressure urticaria with special emphasis on pathogenesis and treatment. Dermatol Ther 2009; 22 Suppl 1:S22-6. [PMID: 19891688 DOI: 10.1111/j.1529-8019.2009.01268.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 26] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- Nicoletta Cassano
- 2nd Dermatology Clinic, Department of Internal Medicine, Immunology and Infectious Diseases, University of Bari, Bari, Italy
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
9
|
Zuberbier T, Asero R, Bindslev‐Jensen C, Walter Canonica G, Church MK, Giménez‐Arnau AM, Grattan CEH, Kapp A, Maurer M, Merk HF, Rogala B, Saini S, Sánchez‐Borges M, Schmid‐Grendelmeier P, Schünemann H, Staubach P, Vena GA, Wedi B. EAACI/GA(2)LEN/EDF/WAO guideline: management of urticaria. Allergy 2009; 64:1427-1443. [PMID: 19772513 DOI: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2009.02178.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 363] [Impact Index Per Article: 24.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/12/2022]
Abstract
This guideline, together with its sister guideline on the classification of urticaria (Zuberbier T, Asero R, Bindslev-Jensen C, Canonica GW, Church MK, Giménez-Arnau AM et al. EAACI/GA(2)LEN/EDF/WAO Guideline: definition, classification and diagnosis of urticaria. Allergy 2009;64: 1417-1426), is the result of a consensus reached during a panel discussion at the Third International Consensus Meeting on Urticaria, Urticaria 2008, a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the EU-funded network of excellence, the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA(2)LEN), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF) and the World Allergy Organization (WAO). As members of the panel, the authors had prepared their suggestions regarding management of urticaria before the meeting. The draft of the guideline took into account all available evidence in the literature (including Medline and Embase searches and hand searches of abstracts at international allergy congresses in 2004-2008) and was based on the existing consensus reports of the first and the second symposia in 2000 and 2004. These suggestions were then discussed in detail among the panel members and with the over 200 international specialists of the meeting to achieve a consensus using a simple voting system where appropriate. Urticaria has a profound impact on the quality of life and effective treatment is, therefore, required. The recommended first line treatment is new generation, nonsedating H(1)-antihistamines. If standard dosing is not effective, increasing the dosage up to four-fold is recommended. For patients who do not respond to a four-fold increase in dosage of nonsedating H(1)-antihistamines, it is recommended that second-line therapies should be added to the antihistamine treatment. In the choice of second-line treatment, both their costs and risk/benefit profiles are most important to consider. Corticosteroids are not recommended for long-term treatment due to their unavoidable severe adverse effects. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T. Zuberbier
- Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Charité– Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - R. Asero
- Ambulatorio di Allergologia, Clinica San Carlo, Paderno Dugnano (MI), Italy
| | - C. Bindslev‐Jensen
- Allergy Centre, Department of Dermatology, Odense University Hospital, Odense Area, Denmark
| | - G. Walter Canonica
- Allergy and Respiratory Diseases, DIMI – University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy
| | - M. K. Church
- Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Charité– Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - A. M. Giménez‐Arnau
- Department of Dermatology, Hospital del Mar, IMAS, Universitat Autònoma of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain
| | - C. E. H. Grattan
- Dermatology Centre, Norfolk & Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, UK
| | - A. Kapp
- Department of Dermatology and Allergology, Hannover Medical University, Hannover, Germany
| | - M. Maurer
- Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Charité– Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - H. F. Merk
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital RWTH Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | - B. Rogala
- Clinical Department of Internal Diseases, Allergology and Clinical Immunology, Medical University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland
| | - S. Saini
- Department of Medicine, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - M. Sánchez‐Borges
- Allergy and Immunology Department, Centro Medico‐Docente La Trinidad, Caracas, Venezuela
| | | | - H. Schünemann
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Hamilton, Canada
| | - P. Staubach
- Department of Clinical Epidemiology & Biostatistics, Hamilton, Canada
| | - G. A. Vena
- Department of Dermatology, Johannes Gutenberg‐University Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - B. Wedi
- Department of Dermatology and Allergology, Hannover Medical University, Hannover, Germany
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
10
|
Nettis E, Colanardi MC, Soccio AL, Ferrannini A, Vacca A. Desloratadine in combination with montelukast suppresses the dermographometer challenge test papule, and is effective in the treatment of delayed pressure urticaria: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Br J Dermatol 2007; 155:1279-82. [PMID: 17107402 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2006.07533.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 38] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.2] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Delayed pressure urticaria (DPU) comes under the heading of physical urticaria. Characteristically itchy, tender or painful weals occur at sites of local pressure including the waistband, soles of the feet and palms of the hands. Lesion onset is typically 3-12 h after the application of pressure, and lesions may persist for more than 24 h. The treatment of DPU is often unsatisfactory. OBJECTIVES To determine the efficacy of desloratadine and montelukast in the treatment of DPU. METHODS The study was conducted in 36 subjects affected by DPU. A challenge test with a dermographometer was administered to confirm the diagnosis. After diagnosis, patients were randomized to receive the following treatment once daily for 2 weeks: (i) oral desloratadine 5 mg plus oral placebo; (ii) oral desloratadine 5 mg plus montelukast 10 mg; and (iii) oral placebo alone. RESULTS At rechallenge, patients from the treatment groups (desloratadine plus montelukast group and desloratadine alone group) demonstrated a significant reduction in mean diameter of papules after 70 s of pressure compared with the placebo group (P < 0.05). Moreover, patients treated with desloratadine plus montelukast showed a significant reduction in mean diameter of papules at 70 s of pressure compared with those treated with desloratadine alone (P < 0.05). In addition, the combination was effective in improving clinical parameters (erythema, oedema and pruritus, and number of separate urticarial episodes). CONCLUSIONS This study has demonstrated that both desloratadine alone and desloratadine plus montelukast administered once daily yield improvements with respect to the baseline assessment, regarding the suppression of the dermographometer challenge test papule and clinical improvement of urticaria. However, the combination of desloratadine and montelukast was shown to be more efficacious and may therefore be proposed in patients with DPU, in order to avoid corticosteroid therapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- E Nettis
- Department of Medical Clinic, Immunology and Infectious Diseases, Division of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, University of Bari Medical School, Bari, Italy.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
11
|
Zuberbier T, Bindslev-Jensen C, Canonica W, Grattan CEH, Greaves MW, Henz BM, Kapp A, Kozel MMA, Maurer M, Merk HF, Schäfer T, Simon D, Vena GA, Wedi B. EAACI/GA2LEN/EDF guideline: management of urticaria. Allergy 2006; 61:321-31. [PMID: 16436141 DOI: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2005.00962.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 191] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
This guideline is the result of a consensus reached during a panel discussion at the second International Consensus Meeting on Urticara, Urticaria 2004, a joint initiative of the EAACI Dermatology Section and GA2LEN. Urticaria has a profound impact on the quality of life, and effective treatment is therefore required. The recommended first line treatment are nonsedating H1 antihistamines. They have proven to be effective in double-blind controlled studies, but dosages increased up to fourfold over the recommended doses may be necessary. However, for different urticaria subtypes and in view of individual variation in the course of the disease and response to treatment, additional or alternative therapies may be required. Immunosuppressive drugs like cyclosporin A and corticosteroids are not recommended for long-term treatment due to unavoidable severe adverse effects. This guideline was, in addition, accepted by the European Dermatology Forum (EDF) and formally approved by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- T Zuberbier
- Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Charité- Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
12
|
Vena GA, Cassano N, D'Argento V, Milani M. Clobetasol propionate 0·05% in a novel foam formulation is safe and effective in the short-term treatment of patients with delayed pressure urticaria: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Br J Dermatol 2005; 154:353-6. [PMID: 16433809 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2005.06986.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 20] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/28/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Delayed pressure urticaria (DPU) is characterized by the appearance of typical painful skin lesions (weals) after pressure stimulus. Oral corticosteroids are effective treatments but long-term therapy is problematic. A new topical formulation of clobetasol propionate 0.05% in thermophobic foam (CF) (Olux) has recently become available. The foam is easy to apply, with low skin residues. OBJECTIVES To evaluate in a double-blind placebo-controlled trial the efficacy, tolerability and safety of CF in the topical treatment of DPU. METHODS Twenty-six subjects with a positive history of DPU (13 men, mean age 44 years) were enrolled in a 4-week trial. CF or the corresponding placebo were applied twice daily. Drug application was performed in the most affected areas and in a target area where a standardized pressure challenge test was performed at baseline and at week 4. Efficacy was evaluated by scoring skin lesions regarding erythema, oedema and itching (0, no sign; 4, severe signs) and by calculating the area of the pressure challenge-induced lesion. Safety was evaluated by measuring plasma levels of adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and cortisol. RESULTS CF significantly (P = 0.0001) reduced lesion area by 84% in comparison with baseline values and by 97% in comparison with the placebo group values. Lesion area in the CF group was reduced from 144 cm(2) to 21 cm(2) at the end of the study. No significant differences in lesion area and clinical lesion scores were observed in the placebo group (lesion area 201 cm(2) at baseline; 216 cm(2) after 4 weeks). A significant clinical improvement was observed in all treated skin areas in the CF group. Mean +/- SD erythema score was reduced by CF from 1.8 +/- 0.6 at baseline to 0.6 +/- 0.5 at the end of the treatment (P = 0.001). Similar modifications were observed also for oedema (from 1.6 +/- 0.6 to 0.2 +/- 0.5) and itching score. Nonsignificant modifications of plasma levels of ACTH, cortisol and glucose were observed in both study groups, in comparison with baseline values. No adverse events were recorded during the trial in either treatment group. CONCLUSIONS CF is effective, safe, convenient and well tolerated in the short-term treatment of DPU.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G A Vena
- MIDIM Department, 2nd Dermatology Clinic, University of Bari, Bari, Italy
| | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
13
|
Kerstan A, Rose C, Simon D, Simon HU, Bröcker EB, Trautmann A, Leverkus M. Bullous delayed pressure urticaria: pathogenic role for eosinophilic granulocytes? Br J Dermatol 2005; 153:435-9. [PMID: 16086763 DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2005.06677.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.4] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
Bullous delayed pressure urticaria (DPU) is a rare variant of DPU. Treatment of DPU is difficult and the underlying pathogenic mechanism of DPU remains elusive. We report a 72-year-old man with DPU and associated chronic urticaria as well as delayed urticarial dermographism. Pressure challenge gave rise to a deep weal covered by multiple vesicles and bullae after 24 h. Histological examination of a skin biopsy specimen obtained 24 h after pressure challenge demonstrated intraepidermal bullae filled with eosinophils accompanied by a dense, predominantly eosinophilic infiltrate in the dermis. Whereas the numbers and morphology of mast cells were unaltered, the extracellular deposition of eosinophil cationic protein revealed evidence for eosinophil activation. Concomitantly, both CD4+ and CD8+ T lymphocytes were present in the infiltrate and expressed interleukin 5. As bullous DPU may represent the maximal variant of DPU, the investigation of the cellular infiltrate and the chemokines/cytokines released may reveal potential pathogenic mechanisms. A possible effector role of eosinophilic granulocytes, T-cell subsets and mast cells is discussed.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Kerstan
- Department of Dermatology Venerology and Allerology, University of Würzburg, Germany
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
14
|
Dawn G, Urcelay M, Ah-Weng A, O'Neill SM, Douglas WS. Effect of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin in delayed pressure urticaria. Br J Dermatol 2003; 149:836-40. [PMID: 14616377 DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2133.2003.05486.x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 48] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Delayed pressure urticaria (DPU) is difficult to treat. High-dose intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG) has been found to be effective in treating patients with autoimmune chronic urticaria. OBJECTIVES To report the effect of IVIG on eight patients with severe unremitting DPU. METHODS IVIG was administered at a dose of 2 g kg-1 over 2-3 days on an in-patient basis. The response to treatment was assessed subjectively and recorded as remission, improved or unchanged. An autologous serum skin test (ASST) was performed in seven patients. RESULTS Three of eight patients achieved remission; two after one infusion and one after three infusions. Two patients improved. Three patients remained unchanged; of these, two declined further treatment after two infusions, and one failed to improve after six infusions at monthly intervals. Four of seven patients had positive ASST; three responded to IVIG. Two developed delayed positive ASST; both responded to IVIG. Of three patients with negative ASST, two responded. CONCLUSIONS IVIG induced remission or improved symptoms in five of eight patients with DPU with severe unremitting disease who had failed to respond to other therapies or were controlled only with systemic corticosteroids. Those who responded did so with three or fewer infusions. ASST is not a reliable predictor of response to IVIG.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- G Dawn
- Department of Dermatology, Monklands Hospital, Airdrie, Lanarkshire, ML6 0JS, U.K.
| | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|
15
|
Abstract
Delayed pressure urticaria is a physical urticaria where erythematous, often painful swellings occur at sites of sustained pressure on the skin, after a delay of several hours. If sought, it is present in up to 40% of patients with ordinary chronic "idiopathic urticaria" to a varying degree. Compared with other urticarias, the pressure-induced lesions impair the quality of life of patients most severely. The pathogenesis is not well characterized, but whealing is dependent on mast cell activation, with the histology of lesions also showing a deep dermal inflammatory infiltrate of neutrophils and eosinophils, without vasculitis. Treatment of delayed pressure is generally unsatisfactory, and is often resistant to antihistamine and a range of anti-inflammatory medication. Oral steroids, although the most effective therapy, are unsuitable for long-term use. Delayed pressure urticaria may persist for many years, and improved or novel methods of management are under investigation.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- A Kobza-Black
- St John's Institute of Dermatology, King's College London, St Thomas Hospital, UK
| |
Collapse
|