Journals / Annals of Medical Research / 2020 / Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 12

Venom immunotherapy: A real-life experience in a tertiary referral center in Turkey.

Pages
3228–3232
Publication Date
2022-10-12
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

We believe that any effort increasing knowledge of venom allergy is important.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Aim: Venom allergy is an important health problem because of life-threatening reactions and impaired quality of life.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials and Methods: Between December 2012 and February 2019, adult patients who underwent venom immunotherapy in Uludag University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Immunology and Allergic Diseases outpatient clinic were evaluated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:We believe that any effort increasing knowledge of venom allergy is important.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2012 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Aim: Venom allergy is an important health problem because of life-threatening reactions and impaired quality of life. The only treatment that can prevent the risk of a subsequent systemic sting reaction is venom immunotherapy. Additionally, there has been limited report about Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy practice from Turkey. In our clinic, which is an important allergy center in Turkey, we aim to share the clinical characteristics of venom immunotherapy patients and to raise awareness by sharing our experience about venom immunotherapy. Materials and Methods: Between December 2012 and February 2019, adult patients who underwent venom immunotherapy in Uludag University Faculty of Medicine, Department of Immunology and Allergic Diseases outpatient clinic were evaluated. The sociodemographic characteristics of the patients, re-stings and reaction type during venom immunotherapy were recorded. Results: A total of 52 patients (44.2% female, 55.8% men; mean age= 48.4 ± 12.9 years) were included. From a total of 52 patients, 41 (78.8%) received VIT with honey bee, 8 (15.4%) with wasp and 3 (5.8%) with honey bee and wasp. Only 4 (7.7%) patients developed systemic reactions due to venom immunotherapy. During the venom immunotherapy period, 19 (36.5%) patients were re-stung by the culprit bee and none of them had any systemic allergic reactions. Conclusions: Our data is consistent with previous literature regarding safety and effectivenes of venom immunotherapy. We believe that any effort increasing knowledge of venom allergy is important.

🔖

Cite This Article

GÜNAYDIN, F. E., ŞEKER, Ü., EDİGER, D., ERBAY, M. (2022). Venom immunotherapy: A real-life experience in a tertiary referral center in Turkey.. Annals of Medical Research, Cilt: 27 - Sayı: 12, 3228–3232. https://ajindex.com/articles/446387

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. Antonicelli L, Bilo MB, Bonifazi F. Epidemiology of Hymenoptera allergy. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2002;2:341-6
  2. Antolín-Amérigo D, Moreno Aguilar C, Vega A, et al. Venom immunotherapy: an updated review. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep 2014;14:449
  3. Ludman SW, Boyle RJ. Stinging insect allergy: current perspectives on venom immunotherapy. J Asthma Allergy 2015;8:75-86
  4. Bilo MB, Bonifazi F. The natural history and epidemiology of insect venom allergy: clinical implications. Clin Exp Allergy 2009;39:1467-76
  5. Bilò BM, Bonifazi F. Epidemiology of insect-venom anaphylaxis. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2008;8:330-7
  6. Ediger D, Terzioglu K, Ozturk RT. Venom allergy, risk factors for systemic reactions and the knowledge levels among Turkish beekeepers. Asia Pac Allergy 2018;8:e15
  7. Muller U, Helbling A, Berchtold E. Immunotherapy with honeybee venom and yellow jacket venom is different regarding efficacy and safety. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1992;89:529-35
  8. Rueff F, Vos B, Elberink JO, et al. Predictors of clinical effectiveness of Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy. Clin Exp Allergy 2014;44:736-46
  9. Oude Elberink JN, De Monchy JG, Van Der Heide S, et al. Venom immunotherapy improves health-related quality of life in patients allergic to yellow jacket venom. J Allergy Clin Immunol 2002;110:174-82
  10. Pumphrey RS. Lessons for management of anaphylaxis from a study of fatal reactions. Clin Exp Allergy 2000;30:1144-50
  11. Ring J, Laubenthal H, Messmer K. Incidence and classification of adverse reactions to plasma substitutes. Klin Wochenschr 1982;60:997–1002
  12. Sin BA, Şahiner Ü. Allergen İmmunotherapy: National Guideline. Asthma Allergy Immunol 2016;14:1-119
  13. Ebo DG, Hagendorens MM, Stevens WJ. Hymenoptera venom allergy. Expert Rev Clin Immunol 2005;1:169- 75
  14. Tang ML, Osborne N, Allen K. Epidemiology of anaphylaxis. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2009;9:351-6
  15. Graft DF. Insect sting allergy. Med Clin North Am 2006;90:211-32
  16. Toletone A, Voltolini S, Passalacqua G, et al. Hymenoptera venom allergy in outdoor workers: Occupational exposure, clinical features and effects of allergen immunotherapy. Hum Vaccin Immunother 2017;13:477-83
  17. Albuhairi S, El Khoury K, Yee C, et al. A twenty-two-year experience with Hymenoptera venom immunotherapy in a US pediatric tertiary care center 1996-2018. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 2018;121:722-8
  18. Golden DB, Kagey-Sobotka A, Norman PS, et al. Outcomes of allergy to insect stings in children,