View clinical trials related to Anaphylaxis.
Filter by:Allergy to Hymenoptera venom is one of the main causes of anaphylaxis in adults, and is less common in the paediatric population. It can be severe or even fatal. Despite the use of an emergency kit, including an adrenaline auto-injector (AAI), at present only hymenoptera venom immunotherapy (VIT) is effective in preventing subsequent severe systemic reactions. Recurrence during the 5 years following cessation of VIT is about 10-15 percent. Studies evaluating longer-term efficacy are scarce. At the University Hospital of Angers, hundreds of patients are treated each year, and its allergology unit has been providing VIT for over 15 years. The purpose of this stufy is to evaluate VIT efficacy among patients who were treated with VIT and ceased VIT from 2005 to 2019, at the university hospital of Angers.
The Anaphylaxis Registry aims to assess data in a standardized form about symptoms, triggers, cofactors and therapy management from patients who experienced an anaphylactic reaction. This should improve diagnosis and long-term management of these life-threatening allergic reactions.
This is a study to determine the relative bioavailability of inhaled epinephrine compared with 0.3mg epinephrine administered IM in healthy male and female participants.
BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is the most severe form of allergy that rapidly affects multiple body systems and can be deadly. The highest incidence of anaphylaxis is in children and adolescents. In Canada, approximately every 10 minutes there is an Emergency Department (ED) visit for food allergy, and up to 80% of anaphylactic reactions in children are triggered by food. The ambiguity in how physicians manage anaphylaxis adds a huge burden to health care and further contributes to ED crowding. Current Canadian and international treatment guidelines universally recommend that all patients present to the ED for a prolonged period (6-24 hours) of in-hospital monitoring after initial reactions have been treated, to increase detection of biphasic anaphylaxis (BA). BA is a second wave of symptoms after initial resolution. These guidelines are based on poor or little evidence and have unintended negative impacts on patient safety and quality of life. Furthermore, this 'one-size fits all' approach to care leads to wasteful resource utilization that provides low value care. OBJECTIVE: The main objective of the study is to derive a clinical prediction rule that identifies children with anaphylaxis who are at risk of BA. METHODS: This prospective multicenter cohort study will enroll 1682 patients from 7 pediatric EDs that are members of the Pediatric Emergency Research Canada (PERC) network. We will enroll patients < 18 years of age presenting to the ED with an allergic reaction that matches the diagnostic criteria of anaphylaxis. Research assistants (RA) present in the ED will screen, obtain consent, and prospectively collect all study data. The Research Assistant or Research Nurse will follow patients during their ED visit and ascertain, in conjunction with the medical team, if the patient developed biphasic anaphylaxis in the ED. A standardized follow-up survey conducted within 2-5 days of ED or hospital discharge will determine if a biphasic reaction occurred following ED disposition. We established an advisory council comprised of end-users and community partners external to the project team to monitor project milestones. STUDY TEAM: We have established an international multidisciplinary team of experts in pediatrics, emergency medicine, allergy/immunology, research methodology and statistics, and knowledge translation. Our team is supported by the PERC network. EXPECTED OUTCOME: Providing the best evidence-based, value care at the lowest cost is a moral and ethical imperative. Therefore, in alignment with national and international research priorities, we propose to develop a robust prediction model for BA. This model will address a significant gap in current knowledge and practice, with anticipated benefit for patient care and health system efficiency worldwide. This trial will generate novel, clinically relevant data on optimal ED management of children with anaphylaxis that integrates best value care with patient safety.
Anaphylaxis is a severe life-threatening reaction following exposure to an antigen. Its incidence is progressively increasing in the general population over years, especially among children. The diagnosis can be difficult, and recommendations for follow up and prescription for an emergency kit are rarely provided after emergency visit. The Investigators will evaluate the management of pediatric anaphylaxis and clinical signs of allergy in the pediatric emergency department of Montpellier University Hospital
Food allergy is a potentially life-threatening condition, and its prevalence continues to increase despite public health efforts. There are currently no known therapies that can reliably prevent food-induced anaphylaxis. This is an open-label study designed to determine the ability acalabrutinib to prevent signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis during an oral food challenge in food-allergic adults.
Prospective monocentric study designed firstly to estimate the proportion of patients who tolerated the continuation of the COVID-19 2nd injection (absence of anaphylactic manifestations). secondly, to know the proportion of definite anaphylactic reactions in cases of suspected anaphylaxis after the first administration of a COVID-19 vaccine the very complete allergological explorations with both the clinical side, skin tests and biological tests will allow us to highlight the responsibility or not of the components of the vaccine,in particular of the excipients (PEG2000, PS80 and tromethamine) in anaphylactic reactions to COVID-19 vaccines A biological collection will be set up during this clinical study in order to study the immunological mechanisms; the effector cells and the signalling pathways involved in these reactions.
Anaphylaxis is a severe and life-threatening complication during the perioperative period. Perioperative anaphylaxis is still associated with a significant mortality despite quick and efficient management using epinephrine, the mainstay of acute treatment. Experimental data and few case reports are suggesting that hemostasis, and more precisely platelets, could play a role in anaphylaxis. Our main hypothesis is that activation of the hemostatic system contributes to the severity of the reaction
Diagnostic accuracy and quality of management in anaphylactic shock is assessed in three conditions: expected, unexpected with no distractor, unexpected with distractor
Anaphylaxis is a potentially fatal condition with a prevalence between 0.05 and 2% in the general population. This is therefore a frequent reason for emergency visits. Its diagnosis is mainly based on the NIAID / FAAN2 criteria, developed in 2006. The treatment of the condition consists of administration of intramuscular (or intravenous) epinephrine and the hemodynamic support of the patient, if necessary. Various other agents are frequently administered (class I and II antihistamines, corticosteroids) but their role is recognized to be less central than that of epinephrine. The relevance of corticosteroids in reducing the risk of rebound reaction is even questioned. After anaphylaxis, a serious phenomenon called a "biphasic reaction" can occur. This reaction is the return of symptoms of anaphylaxis resolution of the initial episode. The theoretical risk of a rebound reaction, or biphasic reaction, is conventionally described up to 72 hours after the initial anaphylactic event. Biphasic reaction is defined as a recurrence or occurrence of new signs or symptoms after resolution of the initial reaction, without re-exposure to the allergen. The potential occurrence of a biphasic reaction often warrants observation of patients for several hours in emergency departments following management of the initial anaphylaxis. Although recommendations and guidelines generally suggest observation times of four to six hours, there is no clear consensus or convincing evidence to guide this conduct. It sometimes even is suggested to observe patients for up to 24 hours. Problem: To date, there are no prognostic factors to identify a patient at greater risk who would benefit from such an observation. As these reactions are a relatively rare phenomenon (i.e. 4 to 5%, but which could go up to 20% according to some sources and the symptoms observed are usually less significant than during the initial presentation, it is therefore possible that a prolonged observation period may not be necessary for some patients who do not have high risk factors for biphasic reaction. In the current context of the growing number of people in emergency rooms and limited ressources, it seems essential to identify low risk patients in order to discharge them quicker and safely by limiting unnecessary observation periods. Objective: Identify and evaluate in a prospective manner previously derived (literature review and preliminary rules derivation already completed) clinical decision rules that are simple, generalizable and valid which could therefore become an interesting assets for the modern practice of emergency medicine as regards to post anaphylaxis rebound reaction risk stratification. It appears likely that some patients who have suffered an anaphylactic reaction could be safely discharged much earlier than in current practices. The rules would give clear guidelines to clinicians especially those working in lower flow settings, where clinical experience with the disease is less developed. Ultimately, these rules would also be relevant for teaching purposes for the various learners who do internships in emergency rooms.