Occupational asthma due to frogs.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to J Subiza.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
We report a case of a nonatopic patient in whom exposure to Voacanga africana (VA) dust precipitated asthma. The patient was indirectly exposed to this dust by her husband, a chemist working in a pharmaceutical plant in which VA is used for the production of vinburnine, an alkaloid derivative. Vinburnine (Cervoxan) is widely used in conditions associated with cerebral circulatory insufficiency. Studies revealed the presence of immediate skin test reactivity to VA dust, and specific anti-VA antibodies were detected in the patient's serum by the reverse enzyme immunoassay technique. Bronchial challenge with a VA extract also resulted in an immediate asthmatic response without late reaction. These findings suggest a type I IgE-mediated immunologic mechanism as being responsible for the patient's respiratory symptoms. Unexposed persons did not exhibit reactivity to this seed with any of the tests referred to above. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported case of occupational asthma caused by VA seeds.
Among the different antigens, insects play an important role in the induction of allergic reactions. We report on a 12-year-old boy with family history of atopy, who developed symptoms of rhinitis and perennial asthma since the age of 5. Patient's symptomatology increased during pollination and kept close relationship to domestic antigens. A skin and inhalation test with an extract of domestic dust was positive. An investigation about potential allergens was initiated and the patient mentioned that was a significant amount of cockroaches at his home. Skin tests, RAST and bronchial provocative tests with a cockroach extract gave positive results. Bronchial provocative tests with a cockroach extract gave immediate and late responses, as has been evidenced by different authors. Immunotherapy has been successfully employed, partly due to the difficulties inherent to an efficient way of preventing insect contact. Improvement of symptomatology correlates well with blocking antibody production and the reduction in white cell sensitivity to the antigenic system. Finally, the potential relevance of cockroach hypersensitivity in our country be underlined. Cockroach sensitivity should be considered in every patient with perennial asthma, in which the usual allergens have been excluded.
Two patients treated with parenteral paramethasone (Triniol) and dexamethasone (Sedionbel) are described. A few minutes after administration of the drugs, they presented urticaria (patients 1 and 2) and conjunctivitis (patient 1). The purpose of our study was to determine the cause of the patients' reactions, the immunological mechanisms involved and whether these patients would be able to tolerate any kind of corticoid. Clinical examinations and skin, oral and parenteral challenges with different corticosteroids and ELISA tests were performed. In the two patients, skin and ELISA tests with paramethasone were negative, as was the prick test with each of its excipients. A single-blind parenteral challenge with Triniol was positive in both patients after the administration of 1 ml of the drug, and negative with its excipients. We also carried out oral and parenteral challenges with other corticosteroids and found intolerance to some of them. These results suggest that paramethasone caused pseudoallergic reactions in our patients. Corticosteroids different from paramethasone also produced hypersensitivity reactions in these patients; however, a few of them were tolerated. The basic mechanisms of those reactions are not yet fully understood. To our knowledge, this is the first report of a pseudo-allergy caused by paramethasone.
A 63-year-old man with chronic, nonallergic rhinoconjunctivitis presented immediate adverse reactions, such as intense itching, burning, redness and severe swelling of both conjunctivae after using disodium cromoglycate eye drops. Skin prick tests and conjunctival provocation tests were positive with pure disodium cromoglycate. Circulating IgE-specific antibodies to disodium cromoglycate in serum were demonstrated by RAST. We suggest that the acute ocular reaction was caused by disodium cromoglycate and that the underlying mechanism was probably an IgE-mediated immunological reaction.