Diagnosis Of Anaphylaxis Research Articles

A Conceptual Framework for Instructional Design of a High Acuity and Low Occurrence Event - Simulation Based Education Training of Residents, Medical Students, and Nurses in Anaphylaxis Utilizing Curated Educational Theories.

The broad goal of this educational curriculum is utilization and optimization of Simulation-Based Education (SBE) in the training of residents, medical students, and nursing staff involved in the rapid and timely recognition of Anaphylaxis and its optimized treatment. A critical gap in Anaphylaxis Diagnosis, Management, and Treatment (ADAM) has been well established across medical disciplines. It is imperative to include all members of the healthcare team, as nurses and pharmacists play key roles in anaphylaxis recognition and care. Nurses and pharmacists are proficiently trained in the initial assessment of acute patient complaints, status, and in proper dosing/administration considerations. Anaphylaxis is a High Acuity and Low Occurrence (HALO) event. Delayed recognition and administration of epinephrine-autoinjector (EAI) is a patient safety concern. Suboptimal technique and expertise in this regard is common. Literature abounds with reports of physician trainee doubts and uncertainties in the recognition and optimized management of Anaphylaxis. Importantly, Anaphylaxis is frequently misdiagnosed in hospital emergency departments. SBE methodologies are ideal for instructing HALO experiences. The framework of the "Zone of Simulation Matrix" supports the utilization of a simulation experience in this instance. Learning will be effective, enhanced, and made durable by embedding numerous specifically curated educational theories. Given the paucity in training of residents and nursing staff in Anaphylaxis, such instruction is imperative. Of note, a special emphasis in this curricular framework is the debriefing experience. Considerations will be given to the psychological safety of the trainees and the importance of the heterogeneity of prior experiences. Precise diagnosis minimizes mortality. In the hospital setting, nurses are the first responders to critical HALO events, and there is a lack of awareness of ADAM by nursing students.

Trends and Variation in Pediatric Anaphylaxis Care From 2016 to 2022

Variation in the use of treatments and hospitalization for anaphylaxis would suggest a lack of consensus in therapeutic approach. To evaluate trends and practice variation in the emergency department (ED) care of children with anaphylaxis in a large US cohort. We conducted a 48-site retrospective cohort study using the Pediatric Health Information System from January 2016 through September 2022. Children younger than 18 years with a primary diagnosis of anaphylaxis were included. Care trends were assessed using negative binomial regression modeling. Rates of medication use, hospitalizations, and revisits were reported as medians with interquartile ranges (IQRs). There were 42,909 ED visits for anaphylaxis, with a 4.2% per-year increase in visit incidence (95% CI, 1.8-6.7) during the study period. The median hospitalization rate was 3.5% (IQR, 2.2-6.0), and the 3-day ED revisit rate was 0.6% (IQR, 0.4-0.9). The hospital-level median use of therapies included intramuscular epinephrine (55.3%; IQR, 50.1-59.9), systemic steroids (73.8%; IQR, 63.9-81.4), antihistamines (59.9%; IQR, 53.5-65.5), H2-receptor antagonists (56.8%; IQR, 42.3-66.2), bronchodilators (15.1%; IQR, 12.5-17.0), inhaled epinephrine (1.1%; IQR, 0.6-1.9), and fluid boluses (19.8%; IQR, 11.3-29.3). Severe reactions requiring intensive care unit admission (1.5%; IQR, 0.8-2.2), vasopressors (0.3%; IQR, 0.0-0.6), and intubation (0.2%; IQR, 0.0-0.3) were rare. ED visits for anaphylaxis increased during the study period, but hospitalization rates were low. Substantial variation exists between EDs regarding the use of anaphylaxis therapies, supporting the need for future research to evaluate the efficacy of these medications.

Anesthetic challenges in a case of hydatid cyst of liver posted for laparoscopic-assisted excision of the cyst

Hydatid cyst caused by Echinococcus granulosus is a common health problem in developing countries. The rupture of hydatid cyst can cause anaphylactic shock or even death during the surgical treatment. We present a report regarding anaphylactic reaction due to surgery to the liver for a hydatid cyst. Clinical examination and contrast-enhanced computed tomography preoperatively revealed a large hydatid cyst measuring 18 cm × 13 cm × 11 cm with few thin septations in the right lobe causing mass effect and splaying of intrahepatic vessels. Intraoperatively, the patient was successfully managed with antihistamines, steroids, crystalloids, and a small dose of vasopressor. After the surgery, she was transferred from the Intensive care unit to the surgical ward on the first postoperative day. The possibility of anaphylactic reactions should be kept in mind, and close monitoring for early diagnosis and appropriate management of anaphylaxis is essential for a favorable perioperative outcome in the case of hydatid cyst surgery.

Management of Anaphylaxis in Dental Practice

Anaphylaxis is a potentially fatal systemic complication that can occur as a side effect of dental treatment, oral and intravenous sedation, and general anesthesia. Although anaphylaxis rarely occurs during dental treatment, once it develops, the signs and symptoms progress rapidly and may lead to upper airway obstruction, respiratory distress, cardiovascular collapse, and cardiac arrest; thus, a prompt response is critical for saving lives. When anaphylaxis develops in a dental office, it should be diagnosed and managed immediately. Based on the clinical findings, emergency medical services should be activated and epinephrine administered intramuscularly without hesitation followed by transportation to a hospital facility for further care. It is very important to establish a definitive diagnosis of anaphylaxis after emergent care to identify the causative agent and perform subsequent dental treatment without triggering a recurrence. This review aims to explain the different issues and necessary considerations in managing anaphylaxis in the office-based dental setting based on established guidelines and practical guides for treating anaphylaxis.

Peanut-Induced Anaphylaxis in Children: A Literature Review.

Peanut allergy has become more common among children and is considered one of the most common triggers for fatal anaphylaxis. Treatment of symptoms during a reaction is only one aspect of managing anaphylaxis; other elements include rigorous dietary avoidance and education about settings that could put the patient at a high risk of unintentional exposure. We aimed to review the prevalence, mechanism, diagnosis, treatment, and emergency action of peanut-induced anaphylaxis among children. We used a web-based literature search using the advanced features of databases such as PubMed, Scopus, Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ), Embase, Google Scholar, and Cochrane electronic databases. The most common food to cause fatal anaphylaxis and a common cause of food allergies is peanuts. Over the past two years, our knowledge improved more about peanut allergens, their prevalence, causes, diagnoses, and treatments. The research cited in this review demonstrates that the peanut allergens are most closely associated with disease differ across cultures, that early oral peanut exposure may reduce the occurrence of peanut allergy while early non-oral exposure may have the opposite effect, that complement activation by peanut constituents appears to promote peanut-induced anaphylaxis, and that oral immunotherapy, anti-IgE antibody, and a herbal formulation are all demonstrating promise as treatments.To conclude, peanut allergies have increased frequently during the past 10 years, especially in Westernized nations. Given that peanut allergy poses a danger for fatal anaphylaxis, response management is crucial. The current standard of care for those with nut allergies comprises complete food avoidance and the administration of injectable epinephrine to treat systemic symptoms.

Idiopathic Anaphylaxis? Analysis of Data from the Anaphylaxis Registry for West Pomerania Province, Poland.

The most common causes of anaphylaxis, according to various authors and depending on the age of the studied groups, are: Hymenoptera venom, food, and medications. Unfortunately, we are not always able to indicate the cause of anaphylaxis. There are data in the literature where as many as 41% of all cases are idiopathic anaphylaxis. Since the introduction of new diagnostic methods such as molecular diagnostics (MD) in our centre, the percentage of idiopathic anaphylaxis in the Anaphylaxis Register has significantly decreased. The purpose of this study was to identify possible causes of idiopathic anaphylaxis in patients with a history of moderate to severe anaphylactic reactions. After using MD, the causative agent was found in another 29 people. The proportion of people with idiopathic anaphylaxis in the Registry decreased from 9.2% to 3.5%. There were no significant differences in the incidence, although men appear to be slightly more common in primary idiopathic anaphylaxis. The mean age of primary idiopathic anaphylaxis was 40 years, but this was as high as 51 for anaphylaxis with alpha-gal allergy. Exercise may or may not be present as a cofactor despite its established role, e.g., in wheat-dependent exercise-induced anaphylaxis (WDEIA). In most of the analyzed cases, i.e., 70%, the reaction took place within an hour. The longest time interval from exposure to the development of symptoms is in the case of alpha-gal allergy; in this analysis, it was at least 5 h after ingestion of the so-called "red meat". Patients are not aware of the disease, or further attacks cannot be prevented. As many as 80% had idiopathic anaphylaxis prior to visiting the centre, and 80% developed anaphylaxis after visiting the centre, which emphasizes the need to not stop the medical team in their search for the causes. As many as 93% of cases required medical intervention, of which adrenaline was used only in 34.5%, antihistamines in 86%, systemic glucocorticosteroids (sCS) in 75%, and fluids in 62% of cases. A total of 83% of patients received an emergency kit for self-administration. Idiopathic anaphylaxis can be resolved as known-cause anaphylaxis after a thorough medical history and, if possible, without exposing the patient after using appropriate, modern in vitro diagnostic methods, including molecular diagnostics. The diagnosis of idiopathic anaphylaxis should extend the diagnosis to include alpha-gal syndrome, LTP syndrome and WDEIA.

Disparities in the Diagnosis and Management of Anaphylaxis.

The goal of this review is to characterize health disparities impacting the recognition and treatment of anaphylaxis. Previous research has identified major health disparities related to atopic conditions including asthma, atopic dermatitis, and food allergies (FA); however, disparities related to anaphylaxis have yet to be examined in depth. We found widespread health disparities in the incidence and severity of anaphylaxis, as well as in the management of allergies (particularly food allergies) that place individuals at risk of anaphylaxis. Sociodemographic factors are associated with numerous negative health outcomes related to anaphylaxis. We highlight several key steps that must be taken to address these disparities.

Triage Grading and Correct Diagnosis Are Critical for the Emergency Treatment of Anaphylaxis.

Anaphylaxis is one of the most frequent and misdiagnosed emergencies in the pediatric emergency department (PED). We aimed to assess which factors play a major role for a correct diagnosis and an appropriate therapy. We reviewed the records of children discharged with a diagnosis of anaphylaxis or an allergic reaction over 11 years from 3 hospitals in the Bologna city area. One hundred and sixteen cases matched the criteria (0.03% of the total admittances) and were divided according to the patients' symptoms at arrival: active acute patients [AP], n = 50, or non-acute patients ([NAP], n = 66). At the patients' discharge, anaphylaxis was diagnosed in 39 patients (33.6%). Some features seemed to favor a correct diagnosis: active symptoms at arrival (AP vs. NAP, p < 0.01), high-priority triage code (p < 0.01), and upper airway involvement (p < 0.01). Only 14 patients (12.1%), all in the AP group, received epinephrine, that was more likely administered to patients recognized to have anaphylaxis (p < 0.01) and with cardiovascular, respiratory, or persistent gastrointestinal symptoms (p < 0.02), as confirmed by logistic regression analysis. Anaphylaxis is still under-recognized and under-treated. Correct triage coding and a proper diagnosis seem to foster an appropriate treatment. Physicians often prefer third-line interventions. Specific training for nurses and physicians might improve the management of this disease.

Abstract 11227: A Rare Case of Echo Contrast Anaphylaxis Complicated by Acute Coronary Syndrome

Introduction: Contrast agents in echocardiography are used frequently to enhance endocardial border visualization and assessment of structural heart disease. Sulfur hexafluoride lipid type A injectable suspension is a generally well-tolerated class of contrast. Anaphylaxis to these agents is exceedingly rare. We now report the first case of acute coronary syndrome in the setting of echo contrast anaphylactic shock. Case: A 49-year-old woman was hospitalized for an ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) for which a drug-eluting stent had been placed in the left anterior descending artery (LAD). An echocardiogram was performed to evaluate for structural heart disease. Shortly after administration of echo contrast the patient developed sudden-onset tachypnea and suffered a pulseless electrical activity cardiac arrest. She was treated for anaphylactic shock with epinephrine and high-dose steroids and achieved return of spontaneous circulation. Following the arrest an electrocardiogram revealed an anterolateral STEMI. The patient immediately underwent repeat angiography which revealed a 100% in-stent thrombosis of the LAD. The occlusion was successfully revascularized with a drug eluting stent with an Impella CP (Abiomed, Danvers MA) support. Subsequent laboratory exam demonstrated an elevated blood tryptase level consistent with an anaphylactic event. Discussion: We present a unique case of anaphylactic shock with acute coronary syndrome following administration of sulfur hexafluoride echo contrast. The incidence of anaphylaxis to echo contrast is less than one per million, and therefore it may not be immediately recognized as a mechanism of shock. Any prior reactions to polyethylene glycol should be noted before using these agents as this ingredient is thought to be the cause of anaphylaxis. In our case, diagnosis of anaphylaxis was confirmed by measuring the serum tryptase level. Tryptase is released from mast cells during allergic events, so this laboratory test with high specificity for anaphylaxis can be a useful tool in challenging cases such as this. Additionally, mast cell and platelet activation secondary to anaphylaxis may be an important mechanism of acute coronary syndrome with in-stent thrombosis.

Improving Methods of Identifying Anaphylaxis for Medical Product Safety Surveillance Using Natural Language Processing and Machine Learning.

We sought to determine whether machine learning and natural language processing (NLP) applied to electronic medical records could improve performance of automated health-care claims-based algorithms to identify anaphylaxis events using data on 516 patients with outpatient, emergency department, or inpatient anaphylaxis diagnosis codes during 2015-2019 in 2 integrated health-care institutions in the Northwest United States. We used one site's manually reviewed gold-standard outcomes data for model development and the other's for external validation based on cross-validated area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC), positive predictive value (PPV), and sensitivity. In the development site 154 (64%) of 239 potential events met adjudication criteria for anaphylaxis compared with 180 (65%) of 277 in the validation site. Logistic regression models using only structured claims data achieved a cross-validated AUC of 0.58 (95% CI: 0.54, 0.63). Machine learning improved cross-validated AUC to 0.62 (0.58, 0.66); incorporating NLP-derived covariates further increased cross-validated AUCs to 0.70 (0.66, 0.75) in development and 0.67 (0.63, 0.71) in external validation data. A classification threshold with cross-validated PPV of 79% and cross-validated sensitivity of 66% in development data had cross-validated PPV of 78% and cross-validated sensitivity of 56% in external data. Machine learning and NLP-derived data improved identification of validated anaphylaxis events.

Immediate hypersensitivity to COVID-19 vaccines: Focus on biological diagnosis.

Soon after the release of the new anti-COVID mRNA vaccines, reports came in from the US and the UK of anaphylactic reactions. Fueled by the necessary caution toward these new vaccine platforms, these reports had a great impact and were largely commented upon in the scientific literature and global media. The current estimated frequency is of 5 cases per million doses. Very little biological data are presented in the literature to support the anaphylaxis diagnosis in these patients in addition to skin tests. Allergic reactions to vaccines are rare and mostly due to vaccine excipient. Therefore, the poly-ethylene-glycol (PEG) present in both mRNA formulation, and already known to be immunogenic, was soon suspected to be the potential culprit. Several hypersensitivity mechanisms to PEG or to other vaccine components can be suspected, even if the classical IgE-dependent anaphylaxis seems to be one of the most plausible candidates. In the early 2022, the international guidelines recommended to perform skin prick tests and basophil activation tests (BAT) in people experiencing allergic reaction to the first dose of COVID-19 vaccine or with a history of PEG allergy. The aim of this review is to discuss the main potential mechanisms of immediate allergy to COVID19 vaccines based on published data, together with the various techniques used to confirm or not sensitization to one component.

The Timely Administration of Epinephrine and Related Factors in Children with Anaphylaxis.

Anaphylaxis is a severe allergic reaction that requires immediate recognition and intervention. This study investigated the factors related to the timely administration of epinephrine in cases of pediatric anaphylaxis. We performed a retrospective chart review of 107 patients who visited a pediatric emergency center with anaphylaxis between 2015 and 2017. In total, 76 patients received epinephrine injections. We analyzed factors including allergy history, anaphylaxis signs and symptoms, allergen sensitization, anaphylaxis triggers, and time of epinephrine injection. Anaphylactic patients who received epinephrine took a median of 50 min to arrive at the hospital, and patients who did not receive epinephrine took a median of 94 min. Epinephrine administration was significantly delayed by more than 60 min from symptom onset in patients <2 years old. Patients presenting with wheezing symptoms or history of bronchial asthma were significantly more likely to receive epinephrine within 60 min of symptoms onset, while patients with food allergen sensitization were significantly more likely to receive epinephrine within 30 min of hospital arrival. Wheezing, history of asthma, age (≥2 years old), food triggers, and food allergen sensitivity were significant factors for the rapid administration of epinephrine. An immediate diagnosis of anaphylaxis and a rapid administration of epinephrine are essential.

Real World Management of Anaphylaxis Versus the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) Guidelines.

Objectives Anaphylaxis is an acute, life-threatening immediate allergic reaction caused by the sudden systemic release of mediators from mast cells. This study aims to assess the current practice of emergency management of children and adults diagnosed with anaphylaxis at the Royal Hospital, Muscat, Oman, in line with the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines. MethodsThis is an observational retrospective study of all anaphylaxis cases seen at the emergency department (ED) from January 2013 to January 2018 and compared with the management of anaphylaxis in the ED as per the NICE guidelines. Inclusion criteria were all patients, children (age 16 and below), and adults diagnosed with anaphylaxis based on the World Allergy Organization (WAO) criteria. Exclusion criteria are all cases labeled as anaphylaxis that did not match the WAO criteria for anaphylaxis.ResultsOf 100 patients with a preliminary diagnosis of anaphylaxis, 49 patients (49%) were true-anaphylaxis cases based on the WAO definition 16 were children (age 16 years and below), and 33 were adults ( age 16 years and above). The other 51 patients (51%) with misdiagnosed anaphylaxis were later diagnosed with spontaneous urticaria, septic shock, vocal cord dysfunction, severe asthma, and anxiety attack. All 49 patients with true-anaphylaxis appropriately received adrenaline intramuscularly at the ED. All 16 children were admitted, seen by an allergist, and received an adrenaline auto-injector when indicated. Only 5 of the 33 adults were admitted and seen by an allergist, and 4 of those required an adrenaline auto-injector upon discharge. The remaining 28 adults were discharged from the ED, and only 3 of these were referred to the allergist. None received an adrenaline auto-injector upon discharge from the ED, and no mention in the ED notes on patient education regarding allergen avoidance.ConclusionThird of the patients who presented to ED were children (<16 years), and two third were adults. Insect venom was the main reason for anaphylaxis in both age groups. There was an underutilization of adrenaline auto-injector prescriptions for adult patients. This could be very well improved by disseminating policies and guidelines to adult physicians.

Diagnosis, Management and Prescription Practices of Adrenaline in Children with Food-Induced Anaphylaxis: Audit in a Specialized Pediatric Allergy Department.

In the era of evidence-based medicine, physicians worldwide should abide by universally approved practices and healthcare units should seek quality control and operational improvement. This audit evaluates the degree of compliance with the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of anaphylaxis in a pediatric Allergy Department. Medical records of 248 children with food-induced allergic reactions who presented both on emergency and outpatient basis were reviewed. Data were also collected from the e-prescription database and anaphylaxis severity was graded according to Sampson’s criteria. An accuracy metric was used to calculate the consistency rate. Anaphylaxis was documented in 188/423 allergic reactions. The degree of agreement for the classification of the reactions as anaphylactic was 88.3%, while the respective rate for non-anaphylactic was 58.7%. In the anaphylactic cases, adrenaline was prescribed in 84.8%, while the respective rates for other drugs were: antihistamines: 27.6%; corticosteroids: 26.1%; inhaled β2-agonists: 11.8%. This study, through the example of pediatric food-induced anaphylaxis, underlines the significance of compliance to guidelines, organized documentation in healthcare units using specially formulated medical history forms and continuous medical stuff training. Thus, diagnosis and treatment practices can be improved for the benefit of patients.

Risk factors of anaphylaxis in Korea: Identifying drug-induced anaphylaxis culprits using big data.

Drug-induced anaphylaxis is a fatal medical condition whose incidence has been increasing continuously. Due to differences between genetic backgrounds and health care systems, different populations may be prone to various causative drugs. Using the Health Insurance Service and Assessment Service database, we investigated culprit drugs for drug-induced anaphylaxis and common medication risk factors in the Korean general population. We collected medical prescription histories within 3 days prior to anaphylaxis between January 2011 and December 2019 from the HIRA database. Designed as a case-crossover study, the attributable visits (case visits) were matched to medical visits (control visits) with the drug sets for each visit. We collected a list of medication risk factors for anaphylaxis and calculated the risk ratio of each agent using the chi-square test and conditional logistic regression analysis. A total of 159,473 individuals were listed in the database with a diagnosis of anaphylaxis in the HIRA from 2011 to 2019. After evaluating the suitability of control visits for matching with a case visit, 8168 subjects and 767 drugs were analyzed. The chi-square analysis identified 31 drugs as potential risk factors for drug-induced anaphylaxis in Korea. After applying a conditional logistic regression analysis for each agent, 5 drugs were found to be the common medication risk factors for drug-induced anaphylaxis: cefaclor, iopromide, iohexol, iomeprol, and tolperisone. We found 5 medication risk factors that showed the highest risk of drug-induced anaphylaxis and their degree of risk using an objective methodology in the Korean general population.

Improving Care at Emergency Department Discharge for Pediatric Patients with Anaphylaxis Using a Quality Improvement Framework.

Anaphylaxis is a potentially fatal systemic reaction that requires prompt recognition and targeted treatment. Despite international consensus and national guidelines, there is often incomplete care for pediatric patients discharged from the emergency department (ED) with a diagnosis of anaphylaxis. Our institution experienced wide variability in discharge planning for patients with anaphylaxis. The goal of our study was to improve care at ED discharge for pediatric patients with anaphylaxis using a quality improvement framework. The specific aims were to increase the frequency of patients diagnosed with anaphylaxis who receive an anaphylaxis action plan at ED discharge from 0% to 60% and to increase referrals to an allergy clinic from a baseline of 61%-80% between October 2020 and April 2021. Targeted interventions included revisions to the electronic health record system, forging interdisciplinary partnerships and emphasizing provider education. Outcome measures were the proportion of patients receiving an anaphylaxis action plan and an allergy clinic follow-up. The balancing measure was the ED length of stay. The study showed an increase in anaphylaxis action plans from 0% to 34%. Allergy clinic referral rates improved from 61% to 82% within the same period. The average length of stay of 347 minutes remained unchanged. Revising the discharge instructions to include an anaphylaxis action plan and reinforcing provider behaviors with educational interventions led to an overall improvement in discharge care for patients with anaphylaxis. Future work will focus on electronic health record changes to continue progress in additional clinical settings.

Clinical utility of serum tryptase levels in pediatric anaphylaxis.

Introduction: This study aimed to evaluate the preliminary diagnosis, demographic characteristics, and outcomes of patients whose serum total tryptase levels were measured while in a tertiary pediatric hospital and to ascertain the role of serum tryptase levels in the etiology, diagnosis, severity, and course of systemic anaphylaxis. Methods: Patients ages between 1 month and 17 years who were followed up in the pediatric emergency department or as inpatients and with a diagnosis of immediate-type reactions between September 1, 2019, and August 31, 2021, were included in the study. Patient data were obtained retrospectively by examination of medical records and patient observation forms. Results: It was determined that serum tryptase levels were measured in a total of 310 patients during the study period. One hundred and fifty-five patients who met the defined diagnostic criteria were named as the anaphylaxis group and their data were detailed. The serum tryptase elevation was detected in 15.5% of the patients among the samples that met the anaphylaxis diagnostic criteria. No relationship was found between the serum total tryptase levels, the triggering factor, and the severity of anaphylaxis. Discussion: Anaphylaxis is a complex syndrome that involves different phenotypes that develop with various triggers in which different immunologic pathways, cell types, and mediators play a role. Serial measurements, including the basal value measured at least 24 hours after the symptoms disappear, are useful to confirm the diagnosis and guide the diagnostic tests during the follow-up, especially allergy evaluation.

An unusual presentation of anaphylaxis with severe hypertension: a case report

BackgroundLow blood pressure and associated postural symptoms are well-recognized manifestations of anaphylaxis. Nonetheless, anaphylaxis can present with high blood pressure and is rarely reported in the literature. We report an unusual presentation of anaphylaxis with severe supine hypertension and orthostatic intolerance.Case presentationA 43-year-old Asian female presented to the emergency department with generalized itching, hives, and postural dizziness after taking a slow-release diclofenac sodium 100 mg tablet. On admission, the patient was tachycardic with a supine blood pressure of 200/100 mmHg. She had urticaria and bilateral rhonchi. A clinical diagnosis of anaphylaxis was made. She was treated with intravenous hydrocortisone and chlorpheniramine, but intramuscular adrenaline was withheld owing to her high blood pressure. She was kept in the supine position, and her vital parameters were closely monitored. Although the respiratory and cutaneous symptoms improved with treatment, her blood pressure remained elevated. Forty minutes later, the postural dizziness recurred as she sat up on the bed and her blood pressure plummeted from 198/100 mmHg to 80/60 mmHg. She was put back in the supine position immediately, and the blood pressure was restored with three doses of intramuscular adrenaline and a fluid bolus. Her postural symptoms completely resolved after adrenaline, but her blood pressure remained elevated. Two weeks after the initial presentation, a diagnosis of essential hypertension was made, which probably had been undetected. In anaphylaxis, where the cardiovascular system is involved, a blood pressure reduction from baseline is expected in patients with preexisting hypertension. Despite cardiovascular involvement, our patients’ blood pressure on presentation to the emergency department was much higher than her pretreatment ambulatory blood pressure, thus making this presentation unusual.ConclusionsDiagnosis and treatment of anaphylaxis can be delayed in patients presenting with high blood pressure. Postural symptoms should alert the clinician to cardiovascular involvement despite elevated supine blood pressure. Early treatment with adrenaline should be considered in these patients with extreme caution.

Cardiac Arrest Caused by Anaphylaxis Refractory to Prompt Management

BackgroundAnaphylaxis is a potentially life-threatening condition that occurs in the emergency department (ED). Although anaphylaxis is rapidly recognized and treated in the hospital compared with that in the community, in some cases, it does not respond to proper management. ObjectiveThe aim of this study is to describe our experience of cases of refractory anaphylaxis leading to cardiac arrest in hospital, to review their characteristics compared with those seen in the community, and to discuss the best management practices for anaphylaxis-induced cardiac arrest with a literature review. MethodsWe reviewed the medical records of patients referred to the ED with possible in-hospital anaphylaxis between January 2017 and May 2021. According to the anaphylaxis protocol, epinephrine, corticosteroid, and antihistamine were administered immediately on-site at our institution before the study period. Refractory anaphylaxis was defined as the development of anaphylaxis-induced cardiac arrest even after following the anaphylaxis protocol. ResultsA total of 246 cases were evaluated for possible anaphylaxis, with 236 cases meeting the criteria for a diagnosis of anaphylaxis. Among them, 178 patients showed the signs and symptoms of shock, and cardiac arrest occurred in 6 patients (2.5%). Of the six patients, three had a return of spontaneous circulation before admission to the ED, while two died due to refractory cardiac arrest despite resuscitation in the ED. Following post-cardiac arrest care, including temperature management, one patient who received extracorporeal cardiopulmonary resuscitation survived neurologically intact. ConclusionWe present our case series to highlight the risk of developing refractory anaphylaxis with subsequent in-hospital cardiac arrest. Patients may progress to cardiac arrest within minutes despite prompt recognition and management. If patients present with potentially fatal symptoms, a more aggressive approach, including intravenous adrenaline infusion, should be taken.

Anaphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination: A registry-based study

Anaphylaxis after COVID-19 vaccination: A registry-based study