Validation of international consensus equation for acute serum total tryptase in mast cell activation: A perioperative perspective

Epidemiology of perioperative anaphylaxis in France in 2017-2018: the 11th GERAP survey

BACKGROUND

Perioperative anaphylaxis is rare but is associated with significant morbidity. This complication has been well described in France by the GERAP (Groupe d'Etude des Réactions Anaphylactiques Périopératoires), a network focused on its study. The epidemiology of perioperative anaphylaxis is evolving, influenced by environmental factors and clinical practice. The aim of this study was to update the epidemiology of perioperative anaphylaxis in France.

METHODS

This multicentre retrospective study was performed in 26 allergy clinics of the GERAP network in 2017-8.

RESULTS

There were 765 patients with perioperative anaphylaxis included. Most cases were severe, with 428 (56%) reactions graded as 3 or 4 according to the Ring and Messmer classification. Skin test results were available for 676 patients, with a culprit agent identified in 471 cases (70%). Neuromuscular blocking agents were the main cause of perioperative anaphylaxis (n=281; 60%), followed by antibiotics (n=118; 25%) and patent blue dye (n=11; 2%). Cefazolin was the main antibiotic responsible for perioperative anaphylaxis (52% of antibiotic-related reactions). Suxamethonium and rocuronium were the main neuromuscular blocking agents responsible for perioperative anaphylaxis with 7.1 (6.1-8.4) and 5.6 (4.2-7.4) reactions per 100,000 vials sold, respectively, whereas cefazolin-related cases were estimated at 0.7 (0.5-0.9) reactions per 100,000 vials sold.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results confirm that most commonly identified triggering agents remain neuromuscular blocking agents. Reactions to antibiotics, particularly cefazolin, are becoming increasingly frequent. The origin of sensitisation to cefazolin is unknown, as no cross-sensitisation has been described, and it should be the subject of further study. Perioperative anaphylaxis should be followed over the years and understood given the changing triggers.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04654923).

Emergency treatment of peri-operative anaphylaxis: Resuscitation Council UK algorithm for anaesthetists

Peri-operative anaphylaxis is a rare but potentially catastrophic event which must be considered whenever unexpected and significant cardiovascular or respiratory compromise occurs during anaesthesia. The Resuscitation Council UK algorithm for peri-operative anaphylaxis highlights the importance of early intravenous adrenaline and fluid resuscitation and provides guidance on the treatment of refractory anaphylaxis and immediate follow-up. This algorithm is endorsed by the Royal College of Anaesthetists, Association of Anaesthetists, British Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology and Clinical Immunology Professional Network of the British Society for Immunology. This document was produced by the Perioperative Allergy Network steering committee in collaboration with the Resuscitation Council UK.

Paediatric perioperative hypersensitivity: the performance of the current consensus formula and the effect of uneventful anaesthesia on serum tryptase

Background

Paired sampling of acute (aST) and basal (bST) serum tryptase has been recommended when investigating patients with a suspected perioperative hypersensitivity (POH) reaction. In the current consensus formula, an aST value exceeding (1.2×bST+2) confirms mast cell activation. The current consensus formula has been validated in adults but not in children.

Methods

We prospectively included 96 children who underwent uneventful anaesthesia and sampled serum tryptase at baseline and 60-90 min after induction. Tryptase changes were then compared with those in 94 children with suspected POH who were retrospectively included from four reference centres in Belgium, France, and Denmark.

Results

We observed a median decrease in serum tryptase during uneventful anaesthesia of 0.41 μg L-1 (-15.9%; P<0.001). The current consensus formula identified mast cell activation in 31.9% of paediatric POH patients. After generating receiver operating characteristic curves through 100 repeated five-fold cross-validation, aST>bST+0.71 was identified as the optimal cut-off point to identify mast cell activation. This new paediatric formula has higher sensitivity than the current consensus formula (53.2% vs 31.9%, P<0.001) with a specificity of 96.9%. Analysis in the subpopulation where a culprit was identified and in grade 3-4 reactions similarly yielded higher sensitivity for the new paediatric formula when compared with the current consensus formula (85.3% vs 61.8%; P=0.008 and 78.0% vs 48.8%; P<0.001, respectively). Internally cross-validated sensitivity and specificity were 53.3% and 93.3%, respectively.

Conclusions

This is the first study suggesting the need for an adjusted formula in children to identify perioperative mast cell activation as tryptase is significantly lowered during uneventful anaesthesia. We propose a new formula (aST>bST+0.71) which performs significantly better than the current consensus formula in our multicentric paediatric population.

Comparison of the passive mast cell activation test with the basophil activation test for diagnosis of perioperative rocuronium hypersensitivity

BACKGROUND

Rocuronium is a major cause of perioperative hypersensitivity (POH). Skin tests (STs) and quantification of specific immunoglobulin E antibodies (sIgEs) can yield incongruent results. In such difficult cases, the basophil activation test (BAT) can be helpful. Here, we evaluated the passive mast cell activation test (pMAT) as a substitute of BAT as part of the diagnostic tests for rocuronium allergy.

METHODS

Sera from patients with a suspected POH reaction potentially related to rocuronium were included. All patients had a complete diagnostic investigation, including STs, quantification of sIgEs to morphine and rocuronium, and BAT. For execution of pMAT, human mast cells were generated from healthy donor peripheral blood CD34+ progenitor cells and sensitised overnight with patient sera.

RESULTS

In total, 90 sera were studied: 41 from ST+sIgE+ patients, 13 from ST-sIgE- patients, 20 from ST+sIgE- patients, and 16 from ST-sIgE+ patients. According to BAT results, patients were further allocated into subgroups. Of the 38 BAT+ patients, 25 (66%) showed a positive pMAT as well. Of the 44 BAT- patients, 43 (98%) also showed a negative pMAT. Mast cells that were not passively sensitised did not respond to rocuronium.

CONCLUSIONS

We show that the pMAT, in many cases, can substitute for BAT in the diagnosis of rocuronium hypersensitivity and advance diagnosis in difficult cases with uncertain ST or sIgE results when BAT is not locally available.

Reversible Elevation of Tryptase Over the Individual's Baseline: Why is It the Best Biomarker for Severe Systemic Mast Cell Activation and MCAS?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Mast cell (MC) activation syndromes (MCAS) are conditions defined by recurrent episodes of severe systemic anaphylaxis or similar systemic events triggered by MC-derived mediators that can be measured in biological fluids. Since some symptoms of MC activation may occur due to other, non-MC etiologies and lead to confusion over diagnosis, it is of crucial importance to document the involvement of MC and their products in the patients´ symptomatology.

RECENT FINDINGS

The most specific and generally accepted marker of severe systemic MC activation is an event-related, transient increase in the serum tryptase level over the individual baseline of the affected individual. However, baseline concentrations of serum tryptase vary among donors, depending on the genetic background, age, kidney function, and underlying disease. As a result, it is of critical importance to provide a flexible equation that defines the diagnostic increase in tryptase qualifying as MCAS criterion in all patients, all situations, and all ranges of baseline serum tryptase. In 2012, the consensus group proposed the 120% + 2 ng/ml formula, which covers the great majority of groups, including cases with low, normal, or elevated basal serum tryptase level. This formula has been validated in subsequent studies and has proven to be a robust and consistent diagnostic criterion of MCAS. The present article is discussing the impact of this formula and possible limitations as well as alternative markers and mediators that may be indicative of MCAS.

Using the Right Criteria for MCAS

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The current article aims to provide a comprehensive update on diagnostic criteria for mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS), addressing challenges in diagnosing and classifying MCAS and its variants.

RECENT FINDINGS

In recent years, there has been a significant increase in our knowledge regarding the underlying mechanisms responsible for the activation of mast cells (MCs) in various pathological conditions. Furthermore, a set of criteria and a classification for MCASs have been established. MCAS is characterized by the presence of typical clinical symptoms, a substantial elevation in serum tryptase levels during an attack compared to the patient's baseline tryptase levels, and a response to MC mediator-targeting therapy. In this report, a thorough examination was conducted on the contemporary literature relating to MCAS, with a focus on comparing the specificity, sensitivity, and robustness of MCAS-related parameters within proposals for diagnosing and classifying MCAS and its variants. Moreover, the significance of employing specific consensus criteria in the assessment and categorization of MCAS in individual patients was underscored, due to the escalating occurrence of patients receiving a misdiagnosis of MCAS based on nonspecific criteria.

Anaphylaxis: A 2023 practice parameter update

This practice parameter update focuses on 7 areas in which there are new evidence and new recommendations. Diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis have been revised, and patterns of anaphylaxis are defined. Measurement of serum tryptase is important for diagnosis of anaphylaxis and to identify underlying mast cell disorders. In infants and toddlers, age-specific symptoms may differ from older children and adults, patient age is not correlated with reaction severity, and anaphylaxis is unlikely to be the initial reaction to an allergen on first exposure. Different community settings for anaphylaxis require specific measures for prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis. Optimal prescribing and use of epinephrine autoinjector devices require specific counseling and training of patients and caregivers, including when and how to administer the epinephrine autoinjector and whether and when to call 911. If epinephrine is used promptly, immediate activation of emergency medical services may not be required if the patient experiences a prompt, complete, and durable response. For most medical indications, the risk of stopping or changing beta-blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor medication may exceed the risk of more severe anaphylaxis if the medication is continued, especially in patients with insect sting anaphylaxis. Evaluation for mastocytosis, including a bone marrow biopsy, should be considered for adult patients with severe insect sting anaphylaxis or recurrent idiopathic anaphylaxis. After perioperative anaphylaxis, repeat anesthesia may proceed in the context of shared decision-making and based on the history and results of diagnostic evaluation with skin tests or in vitro tests when available, and supervised challenge when necessary.

Neuromuscular blocking agent induced hypersensitivity reaction exploration: an update

Acute hypersensitivity reactions (AHRs) occurring in present-day anaesthesia can have severe, sometimes fatal, consequences and their incidence is increasing. The most frequent allergens responsible for AHR during anaesthesia are neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) (70% of the cases) followed by antibiotics (18%), patent blue dye and methylene blue dye (5%), and latex (5%). Following an AHR, strategies for subsequent anaesthetic procedures (especially the choice of an NMBA) may be difficult to formulate due to inconclusive diagnostic analysis in up to 30% of AHRs. Current diagnosis of AHR relies on the detection of mast cell degranulation products and drug-specific type E immunoglobulins (IgE) in order to document an IgE-mediated anaphylaxis (IgE endotype). Nonetheless, other IgE-independent pathways can be involved in AHR, but their detection is not currently available in standard situations. The different mechanisms (endotypes) involved in peri-operative AHR may contribute to the inconclusive diagnostic work-up and this generates uncertainty concerning the culpable drug and strategy for subsequent anaesthetic procedures. This review provides details on the IgE endotype; an update on non-IgE related endotypes and the novel diagnostic tools that could characterise them. This detailed update is intended to provide explicit clinical reasoning tools to the anaesthesiologist faced with an incomplete AHR diagnostic work-up and to facilitate the decision-making process regarding anaesthetic procedures following an AHR to NMBAs.

Perioperative Hypersensitivity Evaluation and Management: A Practical Approach

Perioperative hypersensitivity (POH) is an uncommon, potentially life-threatening event. Identification of POH can be difficult given the lack of familiarity, physiological effects of anesthesia, draping of the patient during surgery, and potential nonimmunological factors contributing to signs and symptoms. Given the unique nature and large number of medications administered in the perioperative setting, evaluation of POH can be challenging. In this paper, we present a practical approach to management with an emphasis on understanding what happens in the operating room, the overlap of signs and symptoms between nonimmunological and immunological reactions, acute management, and subsequent evaluation. In addition, we provide a strategy for further review of an initially negative evaluation and emphasize the importance of establishing management plans for the patient as well as providing recommendations to the medical, anesthesia, and surgical teams for future surgeries. A critical factor for successful management at all points in the process is a close collaboration between the anesthesia and the allergy teams.

Diagnostic value of a medical algorithm for investigation of perioperative hypersensitivity reactions

BACKGROUND

Evaluation of perioperative hypersensitivity (POH) is challenging, and accurate screening tools are needed to optimize the diagnostic process. We aimed to assess and validate the diagnostic value of a published algorithm (using tryptase and clinical presentation) to identify appropriate individuals for further testing for IgE-mediated POH.

METHODS

We analysed the clinical presentation (tryptase elevation, cardiovascular, respiratory, skin involvement) of patients proceeding to testing for possible IgE-mediated POH at a single tertiary referral centre, relative to subsequent skin testing and specific IgE results. Clinical presentations by drug class were also determined.

RESULTS

In 293 consecutive patients, the use of a published algorithm based on one or more of; (i) defined increase in serum tryptase, (ii) involvement of at least two-organ systems, or (iii) presentation with new urticaria and/or angioedema; was highly sensitive [98.8% (CI95: 95.7-99.9%)] but less specific [34.6% (CI95: 25.7-44.4%)] in identifying patients testing positive on skin testing and/or specific IgE. Presentation with cardiovascular symptoms was also sensitive [89.8%(CI95: 84.2-94.0%)], while the combination of respiratory symptoms and increased tryptase was most specific [85.9%(CI95:76.6-92.5%)]. Respiratory involvement was more common in neuromuscular blocking agent allergy, while urticaria/angioedema was more common in antibiotic allergy.

CONCLUSION

The published algorithm (of tryptase rise, two-organ involvement or new urticaria/angioedema) is highly sensitive, and appropriate as a screening tool to identify patients suitable for testing for IgE-mediated POH.

Perioperative Anaphylaxis

Anesthesiologists routinely manage patients receiving drugs and agents, all of which have the potential for anaphylaxis, the life-threatening presentation of an allergic reaction. Clinicians must be ready to diagnose and manage the acute cardiopulmonary dysfunction that occurs.

Incorporating Tryptase Genotyping Into the Workup and Diagnosis of Mast Cell Diseases and Reactions

The measurement of mast cell tryptase levels in serum has found utility in the diagnosis and management of both clonal mast cell disorders and severe mast cell-dependent systemic reactions in the form of anaphylaxis. A more recent discovery is that a majority of individuals with elevated basal serum tryptase levels have increased germline TPSAB1 gene copy number encoding α-tryptase. This genetic trait is referred to as hereditary α-tryptasemia (HαT) and affects nearly 6% of the general population. In clinical practice, the presence or absence of HαT should thus now be determined when defining what constitutes an abnormal serum tryptase level in the diagnosis of mastocytosis. Further, as rises in serum tryptase levels are used to support the diagnosis of systemic anaphylaxis, variability in baseline serum tryptase levels should be factored into how significant a rise in serum tryptase is required to confirm the diagnosis of a systemic allergic reaction. In practicality, this dictates that symptomatic individuals undergoing evaluation for a mast cell-associated disorder or reaction with a baseline serum tryptase level exceeding 6.5 ng/mL should be considered for tryptase genotyping in order to screen for HαT. This review provides detailed information on how to use the results of such testing in the diagnosis and management of both mastocytosis and anaphylaxis.

A Clinical Practice Guideline for the Emergency Management of Anaphylaxis (2020)

Background: For anaphylaxis, a life-threatening allergic reaction, the incidence rate was presented to have increased from the beginning of the 21st century. Underdiagnosis and undertreatment of anaphylaxis are public health concerns. Objective: This guideline aimed to provide high-quality and evidence-based recommendations for the emergency management of anaphylaxis. Method: The panel of health professionals from fifteen medical areas selected twenty-five clinical questions and formulated the recommendations with the supervision of four methodologists. We collected evidence by conducting systematic literature retrieval and using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Results: This guideline made twenty-five recommendations that covered the diagnosis, preparation, emergency treatment, and post-emergency management of anaphylaxis. We recommended the use of a set of adapted diagnostic criteria from the American National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and the Food Allergy and Anaphylaxis Network (NIAID/FAAN), and developed a severity grading system that classified anaphylaxis into four grades. We recommended epinephrine as the first-line treatment, with specific doses and routes of administration for different severity of anaphylaxis or different conditions. Proper dosage is critical in the administration of epinephrine, and the monitor is important in the IV administration. Though there was only very low or low-quality evidence supported the use of glucocorticoids and H1 antagonists, we still weakly recommended them as second-line medications. We could not make a well-directed recommendation regarding premedication for preventing anaphylaxis since it is difficult to weigh the concerns and potential effects. Conclusion: For the emergency management of anaphylaxis we conclude that: • NIAID/FAAN diagnostic criteria and the four-tier grading system should be used for the diagnosis • Prompt and proper administration of epinephrine is critical.

Estimating the within‐subject (CV I ) and between‐subject (CV G ) biological variation of serum tryptase

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Defining baseline variability of serum tryptase levels improves accuracy in identifying anaphylaxis

BACKGROUND

Acute increases of ≥20% + 2 ng/mL (20 + 2 rule) over basal serum tryptase (BST) is the recommended threshold supporting a clinical diagnosis of anaphylaxis. Prospective studies have demonstrated high sensitivity for this algorithm after parenteral exposure, but specificity has not been evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to define a serum tryptase change that distinguishes baseline variability from anaphylaxis on the basis of intraindividual variation in BST.

METHODS

Ninety-three total subjects with atopy (n = 62) or hereditary α-tryptasemia (HαT) (n = 31) and ≥2 BST measurements were identified. Sequential BST variability measurements were modeled and threshold ratios that optimized sensitivity and/or specificity determined. Models were tested in 22 individuals with physician-diagnosed anaphylaxis and validated in independent cohorts of individuals with HαT (n = 33), indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM) (n = 52), and ISM + HαT (n = 12). Mature tryptase levels were measured in HαT (n = 19) and ISM (n = 20). An online application was developed for clinical use.

RESULTS

As a result of BST variability, 9.7% (9/93) of primary cohort patients, and 18% (6/33) of HαT, 30% (16/53) of ISM, and 25% (3/12) of ISM + HαT patients from validation cohorts met the 20 + 2 rule despite absent immediate hypersensitivity symptoms; mature tryptase was noncontributory among individuals with HαT or ISM at baseline. A ratio of acute tryptase/BST exceeding 1.685 provided the optimized diagnostic rule for jointly maximizing sensitivity and specificity. Statistically significant improvement in specificity relative to the 20 + 2 rule was observed among individuals with elevated BST caused by HαT and ISM.

CONCLUSIONS

Using an acute tryptase/BST ratio of 1.685 improves specificity of measured changes among individuals with HαT and ISM while maintaining high sensitivity for confirmation of anaphylaxis.

End-tidal Carbon Dioxide for Diagnosing Anaphylaxis in Patients with Severe Postinduction Hypotension

BACKGROUND

Perioperative hypersensitivity reactions may be difficult to diagnose during general anesthesia. Postinduction hypotension is the most common sign but is not specific. It was recently suggested that low end-tidal carbon dioxide (ETco2) might be a marker of anaphylaxis (Ring and Messmer grades III to IV immediate hypersensitivity reactions) in hypotensive patients under mechanical ventilation. To test this hypothesis, the authors compared ETco2 in patients with a diagnosis of anaphylaxis and in patients with severe hypotension from any other cause after the induction of anesthesia.

METHODS

This was a retrospective single-center case-control study in which two groups were formed from an anesthesia data warehouse. The anaphylaxis group was formed on the basis of tryptase/histamine assay data and allergy workup data recorded over the period 2010 to 2018. The control (hypotension) group consisted of all patients having experienced severe hypotension (mean arterial pressure less than 50 mmHg for 5 min or longer) with a cause other than anaphylaxis after anesthesia induction in 2017.

RESULTS

The anaphylaxis and hypotension groups comprised 49 patients (grade III: n = 38; grade IV: n = 11) and 555 patients, respectively. The minimum ETco2 value was significantly lower in the anaphylaxis group (median [interquartile range]: 17 [12 to 23] mmHg) than in the hypotension group (32 [29 to 34] mmHg; P < 0.001). The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (95% CI) for ETco2 was 0.95 (0.91 to 0.99). The sensitivity and specificity (95% CI) for the optimal cutoff value were 0.92 (0.82 to 0.98) and 0.94 (0.92 to 0.99), respectively. In multivariable analysis, minimum ETco2 was associated with anaphylaxis after adjusting for confounders and competing predictors, including arterial pressure, heart rate, and peak airway pressure (odds ratio [95% CI] for ETco2: 0.51 [0.38 to 0.68]; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In case of severe hypotension after anesthesia induction, a low ETco2 contributes to the diagnosis of anaphylaxis, in addition to the classical signs of perioperative immediate hypersensitivity.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Demystifying α-gal syndrome: identification and risk management in the perioperative setting

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

α-Gal syndrome is among a vexing perioperative consideration for anesthesiologists. Commonly referred to as 'red meat allergy', α-Gal syndrome is precipitated by a lone star tick bite resulting in the formation of immunoglobulin E (IgE) antibodies against the tick salivary glycoproteins and noncatarrhine mammalian tissue.

RECENT FINDINGS

Up to 20% of the population in the southeastern United States may test positive for IgE antibodies to α-Gal. Increasingly, recognition of α-Gal syndrome as an immune response to red meat consumption and certain drugs, many of which may be administered within the perioperative period, has led to greater awareness of the insidious nature of its presentation - from mild urticaria and gastrointestinal symptoms to severe anaphylaxis.

SUMMARY

With the increasing prevalence and identification of α-Gal syndrome, a safe and tailored perioperative process is needed to integrate a pathway that involves multidisciplinary communication, robust information sharing platform, and a structured peri-procedure management.

Diagnostic performance of serial serum total tryptase measurement to differentiate positive from negative allergy testing among patients with suspected perioperative hypersensitivity

BACKGROUND

Serum total tryptase has been shown to increase during acute allergic reactions (acute tryptase, T_A ); however, few studies have investigated the values of T_A or a combination of T_A and baseline tryptase (T_B ) to discriminate positive from negative testing in perioperative hypersensitivity reaction (POH) allergy work up. The aim of this study was to determine the diagnostic performance of T_A in order to differentiate positive from negative allergy testing suspected POH and analyze the diagnostic performance of serial tryptase levels using several formulas.

METHODS

All patients from the University hospital of Montpellier and Strasbourg, France who presented with suspected POH and underwent complete drug allergy work-up between March 2011 and December 2019 with available T_A and T_B were included. Four formulas, including a change in T_A >11 (F1), or >2+1.2xT_B (F2), or >3+T_B (F3), or >120%T_B (F4), were applied.

RESULTS

One hundred and sixty-two patients were included, and 131 of them (80.8%) had grade III or IV reactions. Ninety patients had positive allergy testing. The optimal cut-off value of T_A to distinguish positive from negative allergy testing patients was 9.8 μg/L with an AUC of 0.817 (95%CI: 0.752-0.882, p<0.001). The 93% PPV threshold for T_A was 33 μg/L (95.8% specificity). Paired tryptase levels according to formulas F2 and F3 yielded the highest Youden index (0.54 and 0.53, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The optimal cut-off point for T_A for distinguishing positive from negative allergy testing suspected POH was 9.8 μg/L. T_A value of 33 μg/L was required to achieve >90% PPV.

Clinical reasoning in anaphylactic shock: addressing the challenges faced by anaesthesiologists in real time: A clinical review and management algorithms

Acute hypersensitivity reactions to drugs occur infrequently during anaesthesia and the peri-operative period. When clinical presentation includes the classical triad, erythema, cardiovascular abnormalities and increased airway pressure, the diagnosis is evident and the challenge is to prescribe a therapeutic regimen according to guidelines and to manage refractory signs in a timely manner. In many situations, however, the initial clinical signs are isolated, such as increased airway pressure or arterial hypotension. Rendering a differential diagnosis with causes and mechanisms other than acute hypersensitivity reactions (AHRs) is difficult, delaying treatment with possible worsening of the clinical signs, and even death, in previously healthy individuals. In these difficult diagnostic situations, clinical reasoning is mandatory, and guidelines do not explicitly explain the elements on which clinical reasoning can be built. In this article, based on clinical evidence whenever available, experimental data and pathophysiology, we propose algorithms that have been evaluated by experts. The goal of these algorithms is to provide explicit elements on which the differential diagnosis of AHRs can be made, accelerating the implementation of adequate therapy.

Detection of drug-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) and acute mediator release for the diagnosis of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions

The diagnosis of a drug hypersensitivity reaction (DHR) is complex. The first step after taking the clinical history is to look for a sensitization to confirm or exclude the diagnosis and to identify the culprit drug. Skin tests are the primary means of detecting sensitization in DHR, but are associated with a risk for a severe reaction and may be contraindicated. In vitro tests offer the potential to support or confirm a diagnosis of DHR and influence medical decision making. For immediate-type DHR, a few validated assays for measurement of specific IgE (sIgE) are commercially available to a limited number of drugs. In addition, several home-made sIgE radioimmunoassays have been used in other studies. The sensitivity of the sIgE assay is drug-dependant and generally low (0-85%) for betalactams and reported heterogeneous for other drugs ranging from 26% for chlorhexidine and 44% for suxamethonium to 92% for chlorhexidine. However, as all these studies included patients, in whom DHR was confirmed only by skin tests and not by provocation, the results have to be interpreted carefully and may be unreliable. Determination of mediators during an acute phase of a reaction may indirectly support the diagnosis of a DHR by demonstrating mast cell and basophil mediator release. Negative in vitro tests do not exclude a DHR or imputability of a drug, but a positive result may support causality and eliminate the necessity for a drug provocation test. Unfortunately, evidence is limited with a lack of well-controlled studies in larger numbers of well-phenotyped patients, which results in susceptibility for bias and a need for future multicenter studies.

Selecting the Right Criteria and Proper Classification to Diagnose Mast Cell Activation Syndromes: A Critical Review

In recent years, knowledge about mechanisms underlying mast cell activation (MCA) and accumulation in various pathologic conditions increased substantially. In addition, criteria and a classification of MCA syndromes (MCASs) have been set forth. MCAS is defined by typical clinical symptoms, a substantial increase in serum tryptase level during an attack over the patient's baseline tryptase, and a response of the symptoms to drugs targeting mast cells, mediator production, and/or mediator effects. Alternative diagnostic criteria of MCAS have also been suggested, but these alternative criteria often lack specificity and validation. In this report, we critically review the contemporary literature relating to MCAS and compare the specificity, sensitivity, and strength of MCAS-related parameters within proposals to diagnose and classify MCAS and its variants. Furthermore, we highlight the need to apply specific consensus criteria in the evaluation and classification of MCAS in individual patients. This is an urgent and important medical necessity because as an increasing number of patients are being given a misdiagnosis of MCAS based on nonspecific criteria, which contributes to confusion and frustration by patients and caregivers and sometimes may delay recognition and treatment of correct medical conditions that often turn out to be unrelated to MCA.

Medicolegal Implications of Biphasic Anaphylaxis

ABSTRACT

Biphasic anaphylaxis is an uncommon IgE-mediated condition whose pathophysiological mechanisms, risk factors, and predictive signs are not properly understood. Fortunately, the lethality of biphasic anaphylaxis, although probably underestimated, is low. Preventive clinical measures for biphasic anaphylaxis are neither standardized nor commonly applied. Furthermore, there are no laboratory protocols or anaphylactic markers to help identify the onset of biphasic anaphylaxis in clinical settings. The aim of this review is to highlight the medicolegal difficulties facing coroners and forensic pathologists in terms of the diagnosis and assessment of harm for victims and survivors of biphasic anaphylaxis.

Mast Cell Activation During Suspected Perioperative Hypersensitivity: A Need for Paired Samples Analysis

BACKGROUND

Perioperative hypersensitivity (POH) reactions constitute a significant clinical and diagnostic challenge. A transient increase in serum tryptase during POH reflects mast cell activation (MCA) and helps to recognize an underlying hypersensitivity mechanism.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the diagnostic performance of different tryptase decision thresholds based on single and paired measurements to document MCA in suspected POH.

METHODS

Acute serum tryptase (aST) and baseline serum tryptase (bST) samples were obtained from patients referred to our outpatients clinic because of clinical POH. Tryptase samples from controls were obtained before induction (Tt₀) and 1.5 hours after induction (Tt₁) in uneventful anesthesia. Different cutoff points for tryptase increase over bST and the percentage increase in tryptase (%T) were calculated and compared with existing thresholds: aST > [1.2 × (bST) + 2] (consensus formula), aST higher than 11.4 ng/mL, and aST higher than 14 ng/mL.

RESULTS

Patients with POH had higher bST and aST levels compared with controls (respectively 5.15 vs 2.28 ng/mL for bST and 20.30 vs 1.92 ng/mL for aST). The consensus formula and a tryptase increase over bST of greater than or equal to 3.2 ng/mL held the highest accuracies to document MCA in POH (respectively 81% and 82%). A bST of higher than 8 ng/mL was present in 4% of controls, 5% of patients with grade 1 POH, 24% of patients with grade 2 POH, 15% of patients with grade 3 POH, and 17% of patients with grade 4 POH.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data endorse the consensus formula for detection of MCA in POH. Furthermore, it shows that a bST of higher than 8 ng/mL was associated with occurrence of anaphylaxis.

Diagnosis, Classification and Management of Mast Cell Activation Syndromes (MCAS) in the Era of Personalized Medicine

Mast cell activation (MCA) is seen in a variety of clinical contexts and pathologies, including IgE-dependent allergic inflammation, other immunologic and inflammatory reactions, primary mast cell (MC) disorders, and hereditary alpha tryptasemia (HAT). MCA-related symptoms range from mild to severe to life-threatening. The severity of MCA-related symptoms depends on a number of factors, including genetic predisposition, the number and releasability of MCs, organs affected, and the type and consequences of comorbid conditions. In severe systemic reactions, MCA is demonstrable by a substantial increase of basal serum tryptase levels above the individual’s baseline. When, in addition, the symptoms are recurrent, involve more than one organ system, and are responsive to therapy with MC-stabilizing or mediator-targeting drugs, the consensus criteria for the diagnosis of MCA syndrome (MCAS) are met. Based on the etiology of MCA, patients can further be classified as having i) primary MCAS where KIT-mutated, clonal, MCs are detected; ii) secondary MCAS where an underlying IgE-dependent allergy or other reactive MCA-triggering pathology is found; or iii) idiopathic MCAS, where neither a triggering reactive state nor KIT-mutated MCs are identified. Most severe MCA events occur in combined forms of MCAS, where KIT-mutated MCs, IgE-dependent allergies and sometimes HAT are detected. These patients may suffer from life-threatening anaphylaxis and are candidates for combined treatment with various types of drugs, including IgE-blocking antibodies, anti-mediator-type drugs and MC-targeting therapy. In conclusion, detailed knowledge about the etiology, underlying pathologies and co-morbidities is important to establish the diagnosis and develop an optimal management plan for MCAS, following the principles of personalized medicine.

[Update on perioperative hypersensitivity reactions: joint document from the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) and Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) - Part II: etiology and diagnosis]

This second joint document, written by experts from the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) and Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) concerned with perioperative anaphylaxis, aims to review the pathophysiological reaction mechanisms, triggering agents (in adults and children), and the approach for diagnosis during and after an episode of anaphylaxis. As anaphylaxis assessment is extensive, the identification of medications, antiseptics and other substances used at each setting, the comprehensive data documentation, and the use of standardized nomenclature are key points for obtaining more consistent epidemiological information on perioperative anaphylaxis.

Update on perioperative hypersensitivity reactions: joint document from the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) and Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) - Part II: etiology and diagnosis

This second joint document, written by experts from the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) and Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) concerned with perioperative anaphylaxis, aims to review the pathophysiological reaction mechanisms, triggering agents (in adults and children), and the approach for diagnosis during and after an episode of anaphylaxis. As anaphylaxis assessment is extensive, the identification of medications, antiseptics and other substances used at each setting, the comprehensive data documentation, and the use of standardized nomenclature are key points for obtaining more consistent epidemiological information on perioperative anaphylaxis.

Anaphylaxis to intravenous paracetamol containing povidone. A case report and narrative review of excipient allergy related to anaesthesia

Investigation of intraoperative anaphylaxis includes the exclusion of potential trigger agents the individual was exposed to within a plausible interval preceding the reaction. Occasionally, none of these agents will test positive. In this situation it is important to consider that excipients may be responsible for anaphylaxis, that the dilutions prepared to test the medication may not contain an appropriate concentration of the excipient to induce a positive skin reaction, or if an alternative formulation of the medication is tested, it may not contain the culprit excipient. This case describes a patient, who previously experienced an anaphylactic reaction to Betadine® (Sanofi-Aventis Australia Pty Ltd, North Ryde BC, NSW) experiencing anaphylaxis in the recovery period after general anaesthesia where Betadine was avoided. The recently administered therapeutics were excluded by skin testing, however further investigation determined that a povidone-containing formulation of paracetamol had been administered. Skin testing with povidone-containing paracetamol resulted in a positive reaction in the patient, but not in a volunteer control. Pharmaceutical excipients are added to medications to increase absorption, shelf-life and efficacy. Different brands of the same drug may contain different excipients. When testing for anaphylaxis with such compounds one must be sure the dilution is appropriate for both the parent compound and the excipient to ensure the accuracy of skin-prick and intradermal testing. This case demonstrates the potential for excipients to cause severe allergy and the importance of detailed history pertaining to previous allergic episodes as even the most unlikely of medications can potentially result in anaphylaxis due to excipients.

[Update on perioperative hypersensitivity reactions: joint document of the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) and Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) - Part I: post-crisis guidelines and treatment]

Experts from the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) and the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) interested in the issue of perioperative anaphylaxis, and aiming to strengthen the collaboration between the two societies, combined efforts to study the topic and to prepare a joint document to guide specialists in both areas. The purpose of the present series of two articles was to report the most recent evidence based on the collaborative assessment between both societies. This first article will consider the updated definitions, treatment and guidelines after a perioperative crisis. The following article will discuss the major etiologic agents, how to proceed with the investigation, and the appropriate tests.

Doctor, I Think I Am Suffering from MCAS: Differential Diagnosis and Separating Facts from Fiction

Mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS) is a rare condition defined by a severe systemic reaction to mast cell (MC)-derived mediators. Most cases present with clinical signs of anaphylaxis, and some have an underlying IgE-dependent allergy. A primary MC disease (mastocytosis) may also be detected. Severe recurrent MCAS episodes requiring intensive care or even resuscitation are typically found in patients who suffer from both mastocytosis and allergy against certain triggers, such as hymenoptera venom components. A less severe form and a local form of MC activation (MCA) also exist. For these patients, diagnostic criteria are lacking. Moreover, a number of different, unrelated, conditions with overlapping symptoms may be confused with MCAS. As a result, many patients believe that they are suffering from MCAS but have in fact a less severe form of MCA or another underlying disease. In the current article, we review the potential differential diagnoses of MCA and MCAS and discuss available diagnostic criteria and diagnostic tools. These criteria and assays may be useful in daily practice and help avoid unnecessary referrals and unjustified fears in patients.

Post mortem tryptase: A review of literature on its use, sampling and interpretation in the investigation of fatal anaphylaxis

Post mortem tryptase is a commonly-used ancillary test in the investigation of possible anaphylactic deaths. Ante mortem tryptase interpretation differs from post mortem interpretation due to differing priorities, biochemical behaviours and capacity for follow-up. Additionally, post mortem tryptase sampling site, method and even cut-off levels are not standardised between facilities. This review of the literature investigates the existing research and recommendations on the use of post mortem tryptase in suspected anaphylactic deaths. Currently, autopsy recommendations suggest early sampling, standardised sampling technique with clamping of and aspiration from the femoral vein, and for the results to be interpreted within the wider autopsy and clinical context. Areas in need of further research include the effects of cytolysis on tryptase levels and studies to stratify differing tryptase levels based on type of death and anaphylactic trigger.

Using Baseline and Peak Serum Tryptase Levels to Diagnose Anaphylaxis: a Review

The diagnosis of anaphylaxis relies on a suggestive clinical history after exposure to a potential triggering factor. Serum tryptase concentrations increase on degranulation of mast cells and therefore serum tryptase levels are measured to diagnose anaphylaxis. There is no standardized method for assessing total serum mast cell tryptase (MCT) in anaphylaxis. The Working Conference in 2010 proposed a consensus equation (peak MCT should be > 1.2x baseline tryptase + 2 ng/L) to diagnose acute mast cell activation (aMCA). Our objective was to narratively review the literature since the Working Conference in 2010, examining the use of the consensus equation and other equations comparing baseline and peak serum tryptase during anaphylaxis. Computerized bibliographic searches of PUBMED and EMBASE were supplemented with a manual search of reference lists. English-language studies were included. Eleven studies met our inclusion criteria with a total of 4551 participants. However, only four studies with 653 participants used the consensus equation. The other seven studies used other methods to compare peak and baseline serum tryptase concentrations. Measuring serum tryptase levels is valuable in the diagnosis of anaphylaxis but is unable to detect all anaphylactic reactions. Based on our current literature review, the consensus equation is underused in the diagnosis of anaphylaxis. There is also a need for exploration of other biomarkers which could be used in parallel to peak and baseline serum tryptase measurements for further diagnostic certainty. Serum tryptase is the most studied biomarker in anaphylaxis but is still far from being the ideal biomarker for this. There is a need to identify new potential useful biomarkers. Serum tryptase levels are valuable in the diagnosis of anaphylaxis, but are unable to detect all anaphylactic reactions. Additionally serial tryptase measurements are laborious in daily clinical practice.

Recent developments and highlights in drug hypersensitivity

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) are nowadays the third cause of allergy after rhinitis and asthma with a significant increase in prevalence in both adults and paediatric population with new drugs included as culprit. For this, DHRs represent not only a health problem but also a significant financial burden for affected individuals and health systems. Mislabelling DHRs is showing to be a relevant problem for both, false label of drug allergic and false label of nonallergic. All this reinforces the need to improve accurate diagnostic approaches that allow an appropriate management. Moreover, there is a need for training both, nonallergist stakeholders and patients to improve the reaction identification and therefore decrease the mislabelling. The use of allergy cards has shown to be relevant to avoid the induction of DHRs due to the prescription of wrong medication. Recent developments over the last 2 years and highlights about risk factors, diagnostic approaches, mechanisms involved as well as prevention actions, and management have been reviewed. In these papers, it has been outlined the need for correct diagnosis and de-labelling of patients previously false-reported as allergic, which will improve the management and treatment of patients with DHRs.

Diagnostic application of patent blue V in sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer - Is it time for a change?

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) was introduced in the 1990s, as a minimally invasive procedure for staging the axilla with less morbidity to the traditional axillary lymph node dissection and is now standard management of the axilla in the early breast cancer. SLNB using the combined technique of blue dye and radioisotope is currently the recommended method for lymphatic mapping, and studies have shown high identification rates (IR) (>95%) and low false-negative rates (FNR) 5-10%. However, there are several reports raising awareness regarding patent blue V dye-induced peri-operative anaphylaxis. The main aim of this article is to highlight the emergence of patent blue dye as a new allergen and present evidence regarding the utility of alternative safer methods of evaluation of early breast cancer without compromising IR.

Why the 20% + 2 Tryptase Formula Is a Diagnostic Gold Standard for Severe Systemic Mast Cell Activation and Mast Cell Activation Syndrome

Mast cell activation syndrome (MCAS) is a condition characterized by recurrent episodes of clinically relevant, systemic, severe reactions to mast cell (MC)-derived mediators released in the context of anaphylaxis or another acute MC-related event. It is important to document MC involvement in these reactions in order to establish the diagnosis MCAS. The most specific and reliable marker of systemic MC activation is an acute and substantial event-related (transient) increase in the serum tryptase level over the individual's baseline value. However, the baseline level of tryptase varies depending on the underlying disease and the genetic background. For example, an estimated 3-5% of healthy individuals exhibit duplications or multiple copies of the TPSAB1 gene encoding for alpha-tryptase, and over 30% of all patients with myeloid neoplasms, including mastocytosis, have elevated basal tryptase levels. Therefore, it is of utmost importance to adjust the event-related diagnostic (MCAS-confirming) increase in tryptase over the individual baseline in a robust approach. To address this challenge, the 20% + 2 formula was proposed by the consensus group in 2012. Since then, this approach has been validated in clinical practice by independent groups and found to be sound. In the current article, we discuss the emerging importance and value of the 20% + 2 formula in clinical practice and its role as a criterion of severe systemic MC activation and MCAS.

Paired acute-baseline serum tryptase levels in perioperative anaphylaxis: An observational study

BACKGROUND

Anaphylaxis is recognized mainly through clinical criteria, which may lack specificity or relevance in the perioperative setting. The transient increase in serum tryptase has been proposed since 1989 as a diagnostic tool. Sampling for well-defined acute and baseline determinations has been recommended. We assessed the performance of four proposed algorithms with tightly controlled time frames for tryptase sampling, their robustness with inadequate sampling times, and the possible use of mature tryptase determination.

METHODS

A retrospective study was performed on 102 adult patients from the Aix-Marseille University Hospitals who had experienced a perioperative hypersensitivity reaction clinically suggesting anaphylaxis. EAACI and ICON criteria were used to diagnose anaphylaxis. Mature and total serum tryptase levels were measured.

RESULTS

Based on EAACI guidelines, clinical diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis were found in 76 patients and lacking in 26. The most effective algorithm was the international consensus recommendation of 2012 that acute total tryptase levels should be greater than ([1.2×baseline tryptase] + 2] μg/L to be considered a clinically significant rise. In our cohort, this algorithm achieved 94% positive predictive value (PPV), 53% negative predictive value (NPV), 75% sensitivity, 86% specificity, and a Youden's index value of 0.61. A detectable acute mature tryptase level showed lower sensitivity, particularly in patients with acute total tryptase levels lower than 16 μg/L. Acute tryptase levels varied as a function of the clinical severity of anaphylaxis.

CONCLUSION

Total tryptase levels in serum discriminated between nonanaphylactic and anaphylactic events in a perioperative setting when acute and baseline levels were collected and analyzed by the consensus algorithm.

Biomarkers in Human Anaphylaxis: A Critical Appraisal of Current Evidence and Perspectives

Anaphylaxis is a type I hypersensitivity reaction that is potentially fatal if not promptly treated. It is a clinical diagnosis, although measurement of serial serum total mast cell tryptase (MCT) is gold standard and may help differentiate anaphylaxis from its mimics. The performance characteristics of MCT assays in anaphylaxis has been variable in previous studies, due to multiple factors including differences in the definition of anaphylaxis, methods of MCT interpretation, clinical setting of anaphylaxis, causative agents, and timing of blood sample. An international consensus equation for MCT to interpret mast cell activation has been proposed and recently validated in the context of peri-operative anaphylaxis during general anesthesia. There has been an interest in the detection of newer biomarkers in anaphylaxis including platelet activation factor (PAF), chymase, carboxypeptidase A3, dipeptidyl peptidase I (DPPI), basogranulin, and CCL-2. The key determinants of an ideal biomarker in anaphylaxis are half-life, sample handling and processing requirements, and cost. There may be a role for metabolomics and systems biology in the exploration of novel biomarkers in anaphylaxis. Future studies applying these approaches might provide greater insight into factors determining severity, clinical risk stratification, identification of mast cell disorders and improving our understanding of this relatively complex acute immunological condition. Post mortem MCT evaluation is used in Forensic Medicine during autopsy for cases involving sudden death or suspected anaphylaxis. Interpretation of post mortem MCT is challenging since there is limited published evidence and the test is confounded by multiple variables largely linked to putrefaction and site of sampling. Thus, there is no international consensus on a reference range. In this state of the art review, we will focus on the practical challenges in the laboratory diagnosis of anaphylaxis and critically appraise (a) performance characteristics of MCT in anaphylaxis in different clinical scenarios (b) the role for novel biomarkers and (c) post mortem MCT and its role in fatal anaphylaxis.