Diagnosis of latex hypersensitivity: Comparison of different methods

Claudia Suli, Maurizio Lorini, Gianni Mistrello, Alberto Tedeschi

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

A standardized diagnostic protocol for latex allergy is still lacking, although latex-related manifestations are a common health problem especially among health-care workers and patients with spina bifida. The present study was aimed to compare different in vivo (skin prick test, patch test, use test) and in vitro (specific IgE determination by CAP-Rast, basophil histamine release assay, immunoblot) methods to diagnose latex sensitization in 47 health care workers reporting latex-related manifestations. According to the established criteria, 20 subjects (42.5%) were considered as truly sensitized to latex, 18 with type I and 2 with type IV hypersensitivity. Skin prick test displayed the highest diagnostic efficiency, having higher sensitivity and specificity than specific IgE determination and use test. Patch test with rubber chemicals had a low sensitivity, but a good specificity. Basophil histamine release and immunoblot showed low sensitivity and specificity. A combination of clinical history and skin prick test should be used in order to diagnose latex allergy, except in those subjects reporting life-threatening reactions, in which in vitro specific IgE determination must be preferred. Patch testing with rubber chemicals should be reserved to selected cases. Basophil histamine release and immunoblotting can be performed for research purpose, but cannot be recommended for routine diagnostic use.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)24-30
Number of pages7
JournalEuropean Annals of Allergy and Clinical Immunology
Volume38
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - Jan 2006

Fingerprint

Latex Hypersensitivity
Latex
Basophils
Histamine Release
Skin Tests
Immunoglobulin E
Patch Tests
Rubber
Delivery of Health Care
Sensitivity and Specificity
Spinal Dysraphism
Delayed Hypersensitivity
Immunoblotting
Health
Research
In Vitro Techniques

Keywords

  • Diagnostic methods
  • Health care workers
  • Latex hypersensitivity
  • Skin prick test
  • Specific IgE determination

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Immunology and Allergy

Cite this

Diagnosis of latex hypersensitivity : Comparison of different methods. / Suli, Claudia; Lorini, Maurizio; Mistrello, Gianni; Tedeschi, Alberto.

In: European Annals of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Vol. 38, No. 1, 01.2006, p. 24-30.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Suli, C, Lorini, M, Mistrello, G & Tedeschi, A 2006, 'Diagnosis of latex hypersensitivity: Comparison of different methods', European Annals of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, vol. 38, no. 1, pp. 24-30.
Suli, Claudia ; Lorini, Maurizio ; Mistrello, Gianni ; Tedeschi, Alberto. / Diagnosis of latex hypersensitivity : Comparison of different methods. In: European Annals of Allergy and Clinical Immunology. 2006 ; Vol. 38, No. 1. pp. 24-30.
@article{a4f48ff51ed24495a7ff9df7d6818565,
title = "Diagnosis of latex hypersensitivity: Comparison of different methods",
abstract = "A standardized diagnostic protocol for latex allergy is still lacking, although latex-related manifestations are a common health problem especially among health-care workers and patients with spina bifida. The present study was aimed to compare different in vivo (skin prick test, patch test, use test) and in vitro (specific IgE determination by CAP-Rast, basophil histamine release assay, immunoblot) methods to diagnose latex sensitization in 47 health care workers reporting latex-related manifestations. According to the established criteria, 20 subjects (42.5{\%}) were considered as truly sensitized to latex, 18 with type I and 2 with type IV hypersensitivity. Skin prick test displayed the highest diagnostic efficiency, having higher sensitivity and specificity than specific IgE determination and use test. Patch test with rubber chemicals had a low sensitivity, but a good specificity. Basophil histamine release and immunoblot showed low sensitivity and specificity. A combination of clinical history and skin prick test should be used in order to diagnose latex allergy, except in those subjects reporting life-threatening reactions, in which in vitro specific IgE determination must be preferred. Patch testing with rubber chemicals should be reserved to selected cases. Basophil histamine release and immunoblotting can be performed for research purpose, but cannot be recommended for routine diagnostic use.",
keywords = "Diagnostic methods, Health care workers, Latex hypersensitivity, Skin prick test, Specific IgE determination",
author = "Claudia Suli and Maurizio Lorini and Gianni Mistrello and Alberto Tedeschi",
year = "2006",
month = "1",
language = "English",
volume = "38",
pages = "24--30",
journal = "Allergie et Immunologie",
issn = "0397-9148",
publisher = "Mattioli 1885 S.p.A.",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Diagnosis of latex hypersensitivity

T2 - Comparison of different methods

AU - Suli, Claudia

AU - Lorini, Maurizio

AU - Mistrello, Gianni

AU - Tedeschi, Alberto

PY - 2006/1

Y1 - 2006/1

N2 - A standardized diagnostic protocol for latex allergy is still lacking, although latex-related manifestations are a common health problem especially among health-care workers and patients with spina bifida. The present study was aimed to compare different in vivo (skin prick test, patch test, use test) and in vitro (specific IgE determination by CAP-Rast, basophil histamine release assay, immunoblot) methods to diagnose latex sensitization in 47 health care workers reporting latex-related manifestations. According to the established criteria, 20 subjects (42.5%) were considered as truly sensitized to latex, 18 with type I and 2 with type IV hypersensitivity. Skin prick test displayed the highest diagnostic efficiency, having higher sensitivity and specificity than specific IgE determination and use test. Patch test with rubber chemicals had a low sensitivity, but a good specificity. Basophil histamine release and immunoblot showed low sensitivity and specificity. A combination of clinical history and skin prick test should be used in order to diagnose latex allergy, except in those subjects reporting life-threatening reactions, in which in vitro specific IgE determination must be preferred. Patch testing with rubber chemicals should be reserved to selected cases. Basophil histamine release and immunoblotting can be performed for research purpose, but cannot be recommended for routine diagnostic use.

AB - A standardized diagnostic protocol for latex allergy is still lacking, although latex-related manifestations are a common health problem especially among health-care workers and patients with spina bifida. The present study was aimed to compare different in vivo (skin prick test, patch test, use test) and in vitro (specific IgE determination by CAP-Rast, basophil histamine release assay, immunoblot) methods to diagnose latex sensitization in 47 health care workers reporting latex-related manifestations. According to the established criteria, 20 subjects (42.5%) were considered as truly sensitized to latex, 18 with type I and 2 with type IV hypersensitivity. Skin prick test displayed the highest diagnostic efficiency, having higher sensitivity and specificity than specific IgE determination and use test. Patch test with rubber chemicals had a low sensitivity, but a good specificity. Basophil histamine release and immunoblot showed low sensitivity and specificity. A combination of clinical history and skin prick test should be used in order to diagnose latex allergy, except in those subjects reporting life-threatening reactions, in which in vitro specific IgE determination must be preferred. Patch testing with rubber chemicals should be reserved to selected cases. Basophil histamine release and immunoblotting can be performed for research purpose, but cannot be recommended for routine diagnostic use.

KW - Diagnostic methods

KW - Health care workers

KW - Latex hypersensitivity

KW - Skin prick test

KW - Specific IgE determination

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=32444442036&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=32444442036&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

C2 - 16544585

AN - SCOPUS:32444442036

VL - 38

SP - 24

EP - 30

JO - Allergie et Immunologie

JF - Allergie et Immunologie

SN - 0397-9148

IS - 1

ER -