Case Of Anaphylaxis Research Articles

Consideration of the EXiLE test for predicting anaphylaxis after diclofenac etalhyaluronate administration

Diclofenac etalhyaluronate, an active pharmaceutical ingredient in JOYCLU® (JCL), serves as a joint function improvement agent in knee and hip osteoarthritis patients. However, frequent cases of anaphylaxis induced by JCL administration have been reported. Recent clinical research suggests the potential utility of the basophil activation test (BAT) in predicting JCL-induced anaphylaxis. Nonetheless, the BAT is deemed impractical for routine diagnostic testing due to complex procedures involving whole blood stimulation and flow cytometry-based analyses. In the study reported here, an IgE crosslinking-induced luciferase expression (EXiLE) test which uses patient sera without complicated procedures, was performed with patients who had received JCL, with or without subsequent anaphylactic symptoms. The results of this test were then compared with those of the BAT reported in a clinical research study. Of the six BAT-positive JCL-induced anaphylaxis-experienced patients, four were positive in the EXiLE test and all non-experienced patients were negative in both the BAT and EXiLE tests, thus illustrating a high concordance rate of 92.3%. Further validation of testing conditions is expected to improve these rates. Notably, complement inactivation treatment led to a positive EXiLE result in a BAT-negative patient. In conclusion, it appears that the EXiLE test exhibits promise as an alternative to BAT for predicting JCL-induced anaphylaxis, and in so doing offers a simpler diagnostic approach.

Systemic anaphylaxis following centipede envenomation: A case report and review of literature

ABSTRACT Centipede envenomation is usually not life-threatening. They usually present with local symptoms of swelling and pain. Centipede venoms contain large amounts of allergenic proteins that can pose a risk of allergic complications following the bite. Here, we report a rare but important case of systemic anaphylaxis in the form of abdominal pain immediately following a centipede bite that subsided after adrenaline administration. Knowledge of this systemic anaphylaxis is essential for timely management of centipede envenomation.

Impact of Treatment on Rate of Biphasic Reaction in Children with Anaphylaxis

Objective: Our goal was to characterize a large group of children presenting to the emergency department (ED) with acute anaphylaxis, treated with intramuscular epinephrine (IM EPI) and a corticosteroid (CS), and to determine the impact of pharmacologic intervention on the rate and timing of biphasic reactions (BPR). Methods: We reviewed consecutive children diagnosed with acute anaphylaxis managed in three EDs during a six-year period. All received IM EPI and CS, followed by monitoring for 4–6 hours post-treatment. We analyzed the rate and timing of BPR, comparing the intervals of 0–4vs4–48 hours after initiating therapy. Results: During the study period, there were 371 cases of anaphylaxis, of which 357 (94%) received both IM EPI and CS. Of these, 49 (14%) manifested BPR [84% had received prehospital IM EPI] requiring at least one additional dose of IM EPI [14% required ≥2 additional doses]. All BPR episodes occurred within the 0–4 hour interval after initiating therapy, whereas no patient manifested a BPR requiring an additional dose of IM EPI during the 4–48 hours after initiating therapy (P =<0.001, 95% CI 0–1.3%). No patient returned to the ED with recurrence of anaphylaxis symptoms within 48 hours after discharge. Conclusion: Approximately 1 in 7 children with anaphylaxis experience a biphasic reaction after receiving intramuscular epinephrine. Children with anaphylaxis who exhibit symptomatic resolution four hours following initiation of therapy have a low risk for subsequently developing BPR. Most BPR cases required only one additional dose of IM EPI to effect resolution. The rate of BPR in those receiving IM EPI and a corticosteroid is significantly lower >4 hours vs <4 hours after initiating therapy.

Successful management of anaphylactic shock prior to elective cesarean delivery: a case report

BackgroundAnaphylactic cardiovascular collapse is complicated by aortocaval compression during pregnancy, exacerbated by neuraxial anesthesia. Despite recommendations to administer perioperative antibiotics before anesthesia, common practice in Japan involves administering them after anesthesia induction. We report a case of possible antibiotics-induced anaphylaxis just before anesthesia for cesarean delivery.Case presentationA 24-year-old woman at 37 weeks of gestation presented for a scheduled repeat cesarean under spinal anesthesia. After starting administration of cefazolin prior to anesthesia, she developed anaphylactic symptoms. Hypotension refractory to adrenaline necessitated conversion to an emergency cesarean section under general anesthesia. A neonate was delivered with favorable Apgar scores. Post-delivery, the mother’s hemodynamics stabilized significantly. Elevated plasma tryptase confirmed anaphylaxis. Both mother and infant were discharged without further complications.ConclusionsThis case emphasizes the importance of administering prophylactic antibiotic before anesthesia in mitigating severity of shock induced by anaphylaxis and the crucial role of prompt emergency cesarean in achieving successful outcomes.

11 Is emergency department transfer always required following anaphylaxis and epinephrine use?

Abstract Background Patients known for anaphylaxis are advised to always carry 2 epinephrine auto-injectors (EAI) with them. With epinephrine being the first-line treatment for anaphylaxis, current guidelines recommend prompt EAI administration, followed by observation in the emergency department (ED) for 4 hours. Data supporting transfer to the ED in all cases after epinephrine are sparse. Recent North American allergy guidelines no longer suggest that ED presentation after EAI use is required for all cases of anaphylaxis. Objectives We aimed to describe the need for additional ED treatment in children known for food-triggered anaphylaxis who received at least 1 EAI pre-hospital. Design/Methods Data on children under 18 years with food-induced anaphylaxis who received at least one dose of pre-hospital epinephrine was collected from the Cross-Canada Anaphylaxis REgistry (C-CARE) from seven hospitals. A standardized questionnaire obtained information on symptoms, allergens, comorbidities, and pre-hospital and in-hospital management. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify factors associated with ED management, among children who received 1, 2 or 3 or more doses of epinephrine pre-hospital. Results From 2011 to 2023, 1054 children with known food-triggered anaphylaxis and who used one or more EAIs pre-hospital were enrolled in C-CARE. The mean age at reaction was 8.2 (standard deviation [SD] 5.3) years, 648 (60.8%) were male and 82 (7.8%) of reactions were severe (defined as loss of bowel control, cyanosis, respiratory arrest, hypotension and/or circulatory collapse, dysrhythmia, severe bradycardia and/or cardiac arrest, confusion, and loss of consciousness). Primary triggers included peanuts (n=280; 26.6%) followed by tree nuts (n=173; 16.4%). 193 patients (18.3%) had known asthma and 201 received additional dose(s) of epinephrine in the ED, the majority of whom (177, 88.1%) received one dose. Only 2.9% of patients required admission. Among all patients, reactions to egg were less likely to require additional epinephrine (aOR 0.90; 95% CI 0.83, 0.99), and more likely with severe reactions (aOR 1.24; 95% CI 1.14-1.35). Among patients who received only one EAI pre-hospital, severe reactions (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.19; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.31) and reactions to tree nuts (aOR 1.12; 95% CI 1.04-1.20) were associated with increased odds of an additional dose of epinephrine in hospital. Conclusion One-fifth of anaphylaxis cases that used EAI require an additional dose of epinephrine in ED. Children with severe reactions and reactions to tree nuts are more likely to require additional doses; these cases should be considered for ED transfer and treatment following pre-hospital EAI use.

Severe hypersensitivity reactions to 2 immunotherapy agents in a patient with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. There is currently limited data on cross-sensitivity between immunotherapy agents. In this case study, we report a case of severe anaphylaxis to both pembrolizumab and cemiplimab. Pembrolizumab (Keytruda) and cemiplimab (Libtayo) are both approved for the treatment of metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Infusion reactions occur rarely with immunotherapy agents. However, if infusion reactions are severe, the treatment should be discontinued, and there is no guidance as to whether another immunotherapy agent may be used. An 87-year-old-male was diagnosed with metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma expressing a PD-L1 combined positive score of 81%-90%. He was treated with pembrolizumab and, 15 minutes after completion of the first infusion, developed swelling of the eyelids, ears, and tongue in addition to a whole-body rash without pruritus. Due to the severity of the reaction, pembrolizumab was permanently discontinued and the patient was then started on cemiplimab. The patient received a high-dose corticosteroid as premedication before the first infusion of cemiplimab and tolerated the treatment without any adverse effects. However, when the corticosteroid premedication dose was decreased before the second cycle, the patient had a severe infusion reaction to cemiplimab requiring discontinuation. A patient with metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma developed a severe hypersensitivity reaction to pembrolizumab and subsequently to cemiplimab, despite premedication.

Anaphylaxis post-COVID-19 vaccinations in Singapore.

Anaphylaxis was the first serious adverse event (AE) of special interest surfaced in Singapore following coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination. Individuals who developed physician-diagnosed severe allergic reactions to the mRNA vaccines would be medically ineligible for mRNA vaccines and offered non-mRNA alternatives. This paper describes anaphylaxis reports received by the Health Sciences Authority (HSA) and presents a review of individuals who received heterologous COVID-19 vaccination. Reports of anaphylaxis associated with the COVID-19 vaccines received till 31 July 2022 were reviewed and adjudicated using the Brighton Collaboration case definition criteria by an HSA-appointed expert panel. Additional review was conducted for cases with heterologous vaccination for any subsequent reactions until administration of third dose of COVID-19 vaccines. Among 112 adjudicated anaphylaxis cases, majority occurred in females, adults and persons with allergy histories, which were consistent with global observations. Most cases (71%) occurred within 30 minutes of vaccination. The reporting incidence rates (IRs) of 0.67 and 0.55 per 100,000 administered doses for Comirnaty and Spikevax vaccines, respectively, were comparable with IRs reported overseas, whereas the IRs for non-mRNA vaccines (Sinovac-CoronaVac and Nuvaxovid) were much higher at 4.14 and 29.82 per 100,000 administered doses, respectively, likely due to selection bias. Review of the 20 cases following heterologous vaccination found varying reactions to subsequent vaccinations. Anaphylaxis is a rare but serious AE in which outcomes can be mitigated with timely medical intervention. The case review helped to guide vaccination strategies and added to the cumulative knowledge of safety with heterologous vaccination.

Safety of COVID-19 Vaccines among People with History of Allergy: A European Active Surveillance Study.

Background: Conventional vaccines rarely cause severe allergic reactions. However, the rapid development and approval of COVID-19 vaccines left limited initial data on their adverse reactions, particularly in individuals with a history of allergy. The aim of this study was to assess and compare the safety profile of different doses and brands of COVID-19 vaccines in subjects with a history of allergy vs. those without a history of allergy. Methods: From February 2021 to February 2023, a web-based prospective study gathered vaccinee-reported outcomes using electronic questionnaires across eleven European countries. Baseline and up to six follow-up questionnaires captured data on vaccinee demographics, as well as both solicited and unsolicited adverse reactions. Results: Overall, 3476 vaccinees with a history of allergy were matched with 13,872 vaccinees from the general population at the first vaccination cycle and were included in the analysis. A total of 825 vaccinees with a history of allergy who had received a booster dose, matched to 3297 vaccinees from the general population, were included in the analysis. Higher rates of ADRs occurred after the first vaccination cycle compared to after the booster dose (64-91% vs. 56-79%). However, most reported ADRs were solicited and not serious, and no case of anaphylaxis was reported. Women and vaccinees with a history of allergy reported ADRs more frequently than men and the matched controls, respectively. Compared to other COVID-19 vaccines, a higher proportion of vaccinees experiencing at least one ADR following their first vaccination cycle was observed with Comirnaty and Vaxzevria. Statistically significant differences were observed among the study cohorts for median TTO after the second dose, and for median TTR following the first vaccination cycle and booster dose (p < 0.001). Conclusions: Typically, any drug or vaccine use carries a risk of severe allergic reactions, yet the benefits of vaccination generally outweigh these potential risks, as shown with the COVID-19 vaccines.

Anaphylaxis after treatment with an endodontic material containing polyethylene glycol

Polyethylene glycol (PEG) is sometimes included in temporary endodontic filling materials to modify viscosity. PEG is considered a low hazard chemical, but parenteral PEG exposure is associated with a risk of anaphylaxis. We report two cases of anaphylaxis after treatment with an endodontic temporary filling material containing PEG. One patient survived after hospital treatment, but the second case was fatal. Extensive investigations were needed to find the culprit. Allergic reactions to PEG are increasingly reported and have significant implications for the patient. Precautionary measures are discussed.

Insect anaphylaxis

Anaphylaxis is a serious allergic reaction that is life-threatening. Insect anaphylaxis is diagnosed in one in 10 patients with anaphylaxis. Timely treatment and a clear algorithm of tactics to manage the condition can save the patient’s life. Diagnostics and properly selected recommendations will bring more understanding of the principles of exclusion of future reactions. This article presents data on the prevalence, clinical manifestations, diagnosis and treatment of patients with insect anaphylaxis. A clinical case of wasp sting anaphylaxis is also presented.

Management of anaphylaxis after pre-hospital epinephrine use in children with food-induced anaphylaxis

BackgroundPrevious guidelines recommend prompt epinephrine administration, followed by observation in the emergency department (ED). The need for transfer in all cases of anaphylaxis has recently been challenged. ObjectiveTo evaluate the need for additional ED treatment among children with anaphylaxis who received prehospital epinephrine. MethodsBetween 2011 and 2023, data were collected on symptoms, triggers, comorbidities, and prehospital and in-hospital management from children (<18 years) with food-induced anaphylaxis who received at least 1 dose of prehospital epinephrine presenting at 7 pediatric EDs. Multivariable logistic regression assessed factors associated with the use of 2 or more prehospital epinephrine autoinjectors (EAIs), epinephrine use in the ED, and hospital admission. ResultsOf the 1127 children (mean 8.1 ± 5.3 years; 60.6% male sex) with food-induced anaphylaxis who used at least 1 EAI prehospital, the most common trigger was peanuts (25.3%). There were 209 (18.5%) children who received additional epinephrine in the ED, most of whom (88.0%) received 1 dose. A total of 30 (2.7%) patients were admitted to hospital. Among all patients, severe reactions (cardiovascular instability/cyanosis/loss of consciousness) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.22; 95% CI 1.12-1.33) and reactions to tree nuts (aOR 1.09; 95% CI 1.03-1.16) were associated with increased odds of in-hospital epinephrine use. Prehospital inhaled β-agonists (aOR 1.08; 95% CI 1.01-1.16) use and severe reactions (aOR 1.13; 95% CI 1.05-1.22) were associated with the use of 2 or more EAI prehospital. ConclusionA minority of anaphylaxis cases that used prehospital EAIs required additional treatment, supporting that shared decision making about transfer to ED works for most patients.

Biphasic anaphylaxis reaction in adult female: how to approach?

Anaphylaxis is a severe allergic reaction, usually occurring one to two hours after exposure to an allergen, that can lead to death. Estimated lifetime prevalence of anaphylaxis is 1.6-5.1%, with global incidence between 50 to 112 episodes per 100.000 persons per year. Biphasic anaphylaxis is a form of recurrent anaphylaxis occurring between 1 to 72 hours after resolution of initial anaphylactic episode. Our case presents an 18-year-old female patient admitted to the emergency department (ED) with chief complaint of shortness of breath and swollen eyes after contact with caterpillar while gardening. General physical examination presented tachycardia, tachypnea, angioedema, urticaria. Localized lung examination presented bilateral wheezing. Patient fulfilled NIAID/FAAN criteria. Patient was administered 0.3 mg epinephrine intramuscular, diphenhydramine injection 10 mg, dexamethasone injection 5 mg, and observed in ED for 1 hour. Patient was then transferred to intensive care unit (ICU) and was in resolution. However, patient presented again with initial symptoms of dyspnea, swollen eyes, and itchiness while under observation. The objective of this paper is to present a rare case of biphasic anaphylaxis and further highlight the importance of awareness to occurrence of biphasic anaphylaxis.

Anaphylaxis after SonoVue: A Case Report and a Literature Review.

SonoVue (Bracco, Milan, Italy) is a drug used in ultrasonography for the purpose of increasing the echogenicity of blood or fluids by improving the signal-to-noise ratio. Background/Objectives/Methods: We described a case of anaphylaxis due to SonoVue and performed a literature review. Results and Conclusions: We reported a case of anaphylaxis secondary to the administration of SonoVue and described all the 13 literature cases. Given its widespread use and the potentially dangerous nature of the reactions it can cause, it is advisable to know how to promptly recognize fatal reactions.

Amiodarone-Induced Anaphylaxis.

Background: Amiodarone-induced anaphylaxis is seldom reported. The mechanism of this anaphylaxis is unknown. Methods: A literature search was carried out with keywords "Amiodarone" and "Anaphylaxis" and "polysorbate 80" or "hypotension." A search using "amiodarone" in the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) from 1969 to 2024 was also conducted. Results: There are a total of 10 cases of amiodarone-induced anaphylaxis in the literature. Six patients were male. Ages ranged from 15 to 86years old. Nine cases were triggered by intravenous injection (IV) and one by oral administration. Eight patients did not have previous exposure to amiodarone. The trigger times for IV amiodarone were immediate to 90 minutes. All nine cases of IV amiodarone resulted in hypotension (90%), with an immeasurable blood pressure (70%). Presentations included bronchospasm or a skin rash (60%), angioedema (40%), and unconsciousness (20%). Only one patient had a history of allergy to penicillin and sulfonamide. An amiodarone skin test was positive on one patient. Increased blood tryptase (4 cases), positive basophil activation test to amiodarone (2 cases), increased eosinophil count (1 case), and increased serum IgE (1 case) were reported. Amiodarone was terminated in 80% of the patients. Epinephrine, norepinephrine, antihistamine-1, or steroids were used to rescue patients. Four patients were intubated. All patients fully recovered. In the FAERS database, 89 cases of amiodarone-associated anaphylaxis were reported, resulting in 14 deaths. Conclusions: Solvent polysorbate 80, amiodarone, and iodide may contribute to amiodarone-induced anaphylaxis. Prompt treatment is the key to saving patients.

Agaricus bisporus mushroom anaphylaxis: A case report and review of the literature

Anaphylaxis in response to edible mushrooms is uncommon, and sensitization may be independent of occupational exposure. Globally, A garicus bisporus is one the most cultivated mushroom species, comprising the button, portobello, and Swiss brown varietals. Our aim was to describe a case of anaphylaxis in an older nonatopic patient following ingestion of A bisporus and undertake a review of the literature. A 77-year-old female was referred to the allergy clinic with a history of grade 3 hypotensive anaphylaxis following ingestion of a mushroom omelette. Her tryptase level 4 hours following acute symptoms was elevated. She continued to consume all other omelette ingredients with the exception of mushroom. Additional investigations included specific IgE testing as well as comprehensive skin prick testing (SPT) to raw and boiled mushrooms. One month after her index reaction, the result of SPT to boiled button mushroom was positive. The patient's baseline tryptase level was normal. The results of further SPT with other commonly available boiled mushrooms (the A bisporus mushrooms portobello and Swiss brown, as well as enoki, oyster, and shiitake mushrooms) were also positive.A review of the literature revealed 27 other cases, with an average patient age of 28.8 years (range 8-68 years) and no gender predisposition. Cases from Europe (n= 14, 51.8%) and Asia (n= 12, 44.4%) comprised the majority of the reports. A bisporus was reported in more than one-third of the cases (n= 10, 37.1%) from Australia, India, Portugal, Spain, and the United Kingdom. Cross-sensitization among the edible mushroom species was evident for those individuals who were tested, but no clear and consistent pattern was identified. In some cases, further diagnostics identified α-mannosidase, α-trehalose, mannitol, and ribosomal protein as specific mushroom allergens. Clinicians should be aware of mushroom as a cause for anaphylaxis, especially in nonatopic and de novo presentations.

A clinical case of anaphylaxis after eating oatmeal contaminated with booklice (Liposcelis bostrychophila).

A 52-year-old man presented to our department with generalized erythema, watery stools, and vomiting 30 min after ingesting coconut, oatmeal, and vegetable juice. On arrival, his blood pressure was 120/79 mm Hg, heart rate was 126 beats per min, blood oxygen saturation was 96%, and lip cyanosis was observed. The patient experienced diffuse redness throughout the body and was diagnosed as having severe anaphylaxis. A skin prick test for the leftover coconut, oatmeal, and vegetable juice, which the patient had consumed immediately before the onset of symptoms, showed a positive reaction only to the leftover oatmeal. Direct microscopic examination of the leftover oatmeal revealed numerous insect bodies that appeared as booklice. Using Western blot analysis and quantitative polymerase chain reaction, Lip b 1, a specific antigen for Liposcelis bostrychophila (badonnel), an indoor pest that inhabits various places and feeds on various indoor materials, including stored foods, was detected only in the extract of the leftover oatmeal. Based on these results, we identified an insect body infesting oatmeal, L. bostrychophila. The serum level of L. bostrychophila-specific immunoglobulin antibodies was higher than the cutoff value; therefore, we identified the disease as anaphylaxis caused by accidental ingestion of L. bostrychophila that infested the oatmeal stored in the container. We report the first case of L. bostrychophila-infested oatmeal as an orally ingested allergen in Japan.

Assessment of Perioperative Protamine Reactions in Patients With Fish Allergies: A Retrospective Observational Study

ObjectivesThis study retrospectively assessed the incidence and severity of perioperative protamine reactions in adult patients with documented history of fish allergy. DesignRetrospective, observational. SettingLarge, academic tertiary referral center. ParticipantsAdults with fish allergies undergoing surgeries involving protamine, from January 1, 2008, to March 1, 2018. InterventionsPerioperative protamine administration in patients with documented fish allergy. Measurements and Main ResultsWe reviewed perioperative protamine and anaphylactic reactions. A diagnosis of anaphylaxis or protamine reaction was based on clinical suspicion, perioperative events, and postoperative evaluations. Among 214 patients, two cases (<1%) of anaphylaxis or protamine reactions occurred. Cardiac procedures were most common (67%). Median intraoperative heparin dosage was 46,000 IU, and protamine dosage was 310 mg. Nearly all patients (99%) were admitted to the ICU postoperatively, with a median hospital stay of 6.5 days [5.2, 14.6]. There were three deaths (1%) within 30 days and 15 (7%) within a year. ConclusionsOur study suggests that in patients with history of fish allergy, cross-reactivity with protamine is unlikely, as anaphylaxis and/or protamine reactions were rare among this patient population in the perioperative environment. Based on the findings herein, this study does not recommend avoiding protamine solely based on a history of fish allergy when heparin reversal is required during surgery.

Timing of onset of intraoperative transfusion anaphylaxis: a literature review.

Clinical diagnosis of intraoperative transfusion anaphylaxis using clinical symptoms is challenging and should be made carefully, as an incorrect clinical diagnosis can exacerbate surgical bleeding secondary to stopping a clinically indicated blood transfusion. The timing of onset of anaphylaxis to start of transfusion may be the key to correctly diagnosing intraoperative transfusion anaphylaxis clinically. However, the reliability of this measure remains unknown. A literature search was conducted using MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to June 29, 2021. No language restriction was applied. Two pairs of review authors independently reviewed intraoperative transfusion anaphylaxis cases and extracted data on the timing of onset of anaphylaxis to start of transfusion. A total of 8,918 articles were reviewed, the full texts of 186 articles were assessed, and 20 intraoperative transfusion anaphylaxis cases were included in this study. The 20 intraoperative transfusion anaphylaxis cases included a precise timing of onset. With nine cases, cardiovascular surgery was the most prevalent, and one case was fatal. Fifteen cases had a timing of onset in minutes, and of those, 14 reported timeframes within 30 minutes of initiation of transfusion (median: 15.5, 5-30 minutes). Almost all cases of intraoperative transfusion anaphylaxis occurred within 30 minutes of the transfusion initiation. This timeframe may be helpful in the clinical diagnosis of intraoperative transfusion anaphylaxis.

First Reported Case of Anaphylaxis to Nebulized Tranexamic Acid in a Pediatric Patient: A Rare but Critical Event.

Background: Tranexamic acid (TXA) is a medication used to treat or prevent excessive blood loss due to certain medical conditions. It has a low side effect profile and is safe to administer in most instances. Anaphylaxis cases due to intravenous TXA have been reported in the literature. We report the first pediatric case of anaphylaxis due to the use of nebulized TXA. Case Presentation: A 2-year-old boy with cerebral palsy, epilepsy, and tracheostomy was hospitalized with pneumonia. On the fourth day of hospitalization, the patient started bleeding from the trachea. Nebulized TXA was started to reduce tracheal bleeding. Anaphylaxis developed 5 min after administration of nebulized TXA. Subsequently, the patient was successfully treated with adrenaline, intravenous fluids, antihistamines, and steroids. Conclusion: Nebulized TXA is increasingly used off-label. Although it has a safe profile, side effects such as anaphylaxis may occur rarely. It is essential to recognize the symptoms of anaphylaxis when using nebulized TXA.

Association Between Cardiovascular Disease and Death by Anaphylaxis: A 20-Year Retrospective Study in Queensland, Australia.

Despite its severity, anaphylaxis carries a low mortality rate of less than 1%, making the cohort seen in the forensic pathology setting a small and unique subset of the majority of cases of anaphylaxis in the community. Clinically, cardiovascular disease has been recognized as a risk factor for fatal anaphylaxis; however, there is scant forensic pathology research investigating this risk factor, whereas autopsy textbooks emphasize physical respiratory changes seen in the broader clinical cohort. This 20-year retrospective study examined all fatal anaphylactic deaths in the state of Queensland, Australia, to document the underlying disease of the cases, tryptase levels, triggers, and postmortem findings. Our study found that cardiovascular disease was prevalent in 83.3% of cases of fatal anaphylaxis. Although asthma was prevalent in food-related fatal anaphylaxis (60%) in our cohort, it was poorly represented overall (28%), in contrast to clinical research. Additionally, only 43% of cases showed respiratory changes that were greater than mild. Our findings emphasize the difference between the clinical and postmortem anaphylaxis cohorts, and provide autopsy evidence of a potential role of cardiovascular disease in fatal anaphylaxis.