Article

Correlation between conjunctival provocation test (CPT) and systemic allergometric tests in allergic conjunctivitis.

Regional Centre for the Diagnosis and the Treatment of Inflammatory Eye Diseases, University of Padova, Italy.
Eye (Impact Factor: 1.9). 02/1990; 4 ( Pt 5):760-4. DOI: 10.1038/eye.1990.109
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT In order to assess the potential usefulness of CPT as a diagnostic tool for ocular allergy, the correlation between skin/RAST tests and CPT was determined in 144 patients affected by allergic 'hay fever' type conjunctivitis. The results showed that an agreement between skin/RAST tests and CPT occurred in 71% of the cases (130/183). Of the 29% uncorrelated cases, 23% (43/183) were positive for at least one specific antigen by skin/RAST tests but not by CPT, while 6% (10/183) were positive for at least one specific antigen by CPT, but not by skin/RAST tests. CPT dramatically increased the histamine levels in tears (p less than 0.001). These findings show that (1) systemic tests can be misleading in that they may suggest a specific sensitisation which, in fact, does not involve the conjunctiva (systemic test positive/CPT negative); (2) CPT can identify local conjunctival sensitisation in the absence of a systemic sensitisation (systemic test negative/CPT positive); (3) CPT can demonstrate that allergic 'hay fever' type conjunctivitis may be related to allergens different from those responsible for a systemic sensitisation.

0 Followers
 · 
60 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Ocular allergy can take several different clinical forms, including those in which IgE-mediated reactions are predominant or in others where they are an aggregating factor. The need for an allergy workup varies depending on the clinical manifestations. Pollen-induced conjunctivitis, so-called seasonal pollinosis, is in general easily diagnosed and the allergy workup is used only to confirm the identity of the responsible allergen(s). Conjunctivitis associated with perennial allergens is sometimes more difficult to diagnose, in which case the allergy workup is a essential diagnostic element. However, allergic sensitisation is not always synonymous with allergic conjunctivitis, and other local examinations, such as a conjunctival provocation test, are sometimes necessary to establish the diagnosis. Atopic vernal keratoconjunctivitis and atopic keratoconjunctivitis are two special forms of keratoconjunctivitis, the first involving pre-pubertal males and the second involving young adults with a history of atopic dermatitis. In these two conditions, conjunctival sensitisation is not the principal mechanism, but it can aggravate the disease. Results of an allergy workup can provide evidence for recommending avoidance of the allergen(s) or specific immunotherapy, which may ameliorate the evolution of the disease. Contact eczema may require a dermatological workup when the allergen has not been identified in the allergy workup. Finally, certain cases of chronic conjunctivitis occurring in association with dry eye syndrome or with blepharitis, such as ocular rosacea, can look like allergic conjunctivitis and vice versa. An allergy workup is then an important diagnostic element. Thus, an allergy workup has a variable but often important place in the care of patients with conjunctivitis.
    Revue Française d Allergologie et d Immunologie Clinique 04/2005; 45(3):222-225. DOI:10.1016/j.allerg.2005.02.007 · 0.24 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: No parameters currently exist that can reliably predict the impact of preseasonal immunotherapy on the symptoms occurring during the season. The purpose of our studies was to prove a correlation between preseasonal conjunctival allergen challenge and coseasonal primary clinical endpoints using the total combined score, ie, a combination of symptoms and medication score, as the primary outcome parameter. Twelve weeks before both the birch and the grass pollen seasons, 2 separate prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled studies were conducted followed by posttrial observations for each study during the active season. In the studies, patients who reacted to conjunctival allergen challenge were treated with sublingual immunotherapy tablets that contain either birch and/or alder or grass pollen allergoids. In all, 158 patients were included in the grass and 160 in the tree pollen study; of these, 100 and 109 patients, respectively, took part in the posttrial observations. When comparing patients with and without a positive reaction in the final conjunctival allergen challenge, the results revealed a significant difference in the total combined score (grass: P < .001; birch: P = .039). The same applied to the rescue medication score (P = .005; P = .025). A significant difference regarding the rhinoconjunctivitis symptom score was shown in the grass pollen study (P = .002), and the difference of well days was significant in the tree pollen study (P = .049). When comparing patients based on their reaction to allergen challenge after immunotherapy, each study leads to similarly significant results. Therefore, conjunctival allergen challenge can be used effectively as a parameter to predict allergic rhinoconjunctivitis symptoms during the season in patients treated with preseasonal sublingual immunotherapy tablets. Whether this can be transferred to untreated patients needs to be determined. Copyright © 2015 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The place of allergy in the diagnosis of chronic recurrent conjunctivitis in children is documented in a population of 24 children between the ages of 4 and 14 years 10 months, presenting with an ophthalmological diagnosis of acute and recurrent conjunctivitis (ARC; n = 7), chronic conjunctivitis (CC; n = 12) or vernal conjunctivitis (VC; n = 7). The 15 children satisfying two of the following three criteria were considered to be « allergic : high total IgE, positive skin test, specific IgE titre greater than 3.5 μ/mL. Twelve of these children were considered to suffer from « conjunctival allergy , as their lacrimal IgE was greater than ++, or their lacrimal ECP was greater than the serum ECP, or their conjunctival provocation test was positive to an allergen. The comparative, blood and lacrimal, allergological and laboratory assessment revealed 6 cases of conjunctival sensitization to Graminaceae pollen, 4 cases of house dust mite allergy, and only one case of sensitization to alternaria and peanuts. None of the three ophthalmological forms was more particularly associated with the diagnosis of allergy or conjunctival allergy. The serum and lacrimal total IgE levels were higher in ARC than in the 2 chronic forms. The ECP of tears was higher in CC (115 ± 38.2 ng/mL) than in CAR (80.6 ± 41.9 ng/mL) and VC (39.4 ± 19.9 ng/mL). Lacrimal levels of protein, albumin and lysozyme were not significantly different between the three forms of conjunctivitis, but confirmed the presence of conjunctival inflammation.
    Revue Française d Allergologie et d Immunologie Clinique 09/1996; 36(5):459-465. DOI:10.1016/S0335-7457(96)80003-7 · 0.24 Impact Factor

Full-text (2 Sources)

Download
15 Downloads
Available from
Jun 2, 2014