BackgroundAn allergy to mango is extremely rare. The antigenic composition of the fruit is not fully known. Profilin from mango has a structure similar to birch tree profiling: it is responsible for cross-reactions between mango and pear, apple, and peach. A panallergen with a structure similar to mugwort defensin (Art v 1) which cross-reacts with celery, carrot, peanuts, pepper, aniseed, and caraway has been previously described.Case studyA female patient, 30 years old, was admitted in February 2017 because of recurrent allergic reactions following consumption of various foods. The most severe allergic reaction in the patient’s life occurred after eating a mango fruit. Within several minutes the patient developed a generalised urticaria, followed by facial oedema, strong stomach pain and watery diarrhoea. The diagnostics involved skin tests with a set of inhalatory and food allergens, including native skin tests. The patient also experienced symptoms of recurrent, generalized urticaria in connection with consumption of various types of food, especially complex dishes containing many different ingredients. Additionally, an interview revealed that the patient was experiencing symptoms of the oral allergy syndrome after ingesting various fruit and vegetables, especially during late summer and fall. Diagnostics was extended by determining the levels of IgE specific for allergen components, using the ImmunoCap ISAC method. In order to confirm the occurence of a cross-reaction between mugwort and mango allergens, we performed the inhibition test of IgE specific for mugwort using a mango allergen extract and ImmunoCap matrix.ResultsSkin prick tests (SPT) were positive for allergens of grass 7 mm; weeds 8 mm; cat’s fur 5 mm; mugwort 6 mm. SPT were also positive for mango. The level of specific IgE was increased for allergens of mugwort, grass, celery, pepper, carrot, mango, banana, peach, and apple. The ImmunoCap ISAC test demonstrated a high level of specific IgE rPhl p 1 (timothy grass) and Art v 1 (mugwort). We also performed the IgE inhibition test using both mango extract and ImmunoCap matrix and confirmed a cross-reaction with Art v 1 in the pathogenesis of symptoms observed in the patient.ConclusionsAn anaphylactic reaction to consumed mango, resulting from cross-allergy with mugwort Art v 1 was diagnosed in the patient. Acute urticarial in this case is a manifestation of IgE-mediated food allergy. During in vitro diagnostic procedures we found an elevated concentration of IgE specific to several food allergens (including celery, peppers, carrot, banana, peach, apple, shrimp). The elimination diet removing allergens the patient was allergic to was recommended. Considering the anaphylactic reaction the patient was instructed to carry a rescue set composed of an adrenaline autosyringe, steroids, and antihistamines.
BackgroundComponent resolved allergen diagnosis allows for a precise evaluation of the sensitization profiles of patients sensitized to felines and canines. An accurate interpretation of these results allows better insight into the evolution of a given patients sensitizations, and allows for a more precise evaluation of their prognoses.Methods70 patients (42 women and 28 men, aged 18–65, with the average of 35.5) with a positive feline or canine allergy diagnosis were included in the research group. 30 patients with a negative allergy diagnosis were included in the control group. The total IgE levels of all patients with allergies as well as their allergen-specific IgE to feline and canine allergens were measured. Specific IgE levels to canine (Can f 1, Can f 2, Can f 3, Can f 5) and feline (Fel d 1, Fel d 2, Fel d 4) allergen components were also measured with the use of the ImmunoCap method.ResultsMonosensitization for only one canine or feline component was found in 30% of patients. As predicted, the main feline allergen was Fel d 1, which sensitized as many as 93.9% of patients sensitized to felines. Among 65 patients sensitized to at least one feline component, for 30 patients (46.2%) the only sensitizing feline component was Fel d 1. Only 19 patients in that group (63.3%) were not simultaneously sensitized to dogs and 11 (36.7%), the isolated sensitization to feline Fel d 1 notwithstanding, displayed concurrent sensitizations to one of the canine allergen components. Fel d 4 sensitized 49.2% of the research group.64.3% of patients sensitized to canine components had heightened levels of specific IgE to Can f 1. Monosensitization in that group occurred for 32.1% of the patients. Sensitization to Can f 5 was observed among 52.4% of the patients.ConclusionsConcurrent sensitizations to a few allergic components, not only cross-reactive but also originating in different protein families, are a significant problem for patients sensitized to animals.
Objectives: This prospective study aimed to assess the effectiveness of foramen ovale examination in classifying prenatal hypoplastic left heart syndrome (HLHS) in accordance with the new classification groupings for congenital heart defects. Material and methods: The analysis included 145 fetuses with HLHS, diagnosed and monitored between 2008 and 2015 in Prenatal Cardiology Department at Polish Mother's Memorial Hospital Research Institute in Lodz. The main criteria for classifying our study population into three subgroups was was the presence of a foramen ovale restriction, which we diagnosed by evaluating the diameter and blood flow through the foramen ovale. Of the total group, 73.8% (n = 107) were classified as severe planned, 24.1% (n = 35) as severe urgent, and 2.1% (n = 3) as the severest group. Results: Comparing the severe planned and the severe urgent HLHS groups showed: gestational age of delivery 38 vs 38 weeks respectively (p = 0.45); cesarean delivery 62% vs 79.2% (p = 0.15); neonatal birth weight 3110 g vs 2985 g (p = 0.2); Apgar score 9 vs 9 points; survival rate 65.8% vs 61.9% (p = 0.8); and hospitalization 38 vs 46.5 days (p = 0.059). Prenatal qualification for the group of severe urgent HLHS was characterized by 100% sensitivity, 80.6% specificity and a low positive predictive value of 9.5%. Conclusions: 1. Prenatal qualification into the group of severe urgent CHD based on the features of foramen ovale was characterized by high sensitivity, a satisfying specificity and a low positive predictive value. 2. Prenatally diagnosed foramen ovale restriction may be a predictor of longer hospitalization, but not of a need for an urgent Rashkind procedure. 3. New classifications of CHDs allowed clinicians to determine prognoses and to plan optimal multi-specialized care which resulted in similar outcomes between the severe planned and severe urgent HLHS groups.
Sunflower seeds are a rare source of allergy, but several cases of occupational allergies to sunflowers have been described. Sunflower allergens on the whole, however, still await precise and systematic description. We present an interesting case of a 40-year-old male patient, admitted to hospital due to shortness of breath and urticaria, both of which appeared shortly after the patient ingested sunflower seeds. Our laryngological examination revealed swelling of the pharynx with retention of saliva and swelling of the mouth and tongue. During diagnostics, 2 months later, we found that skin prick tests were positive to mugwort pollen (12/9 mm), oranges (6/6 mm), egg protein (3/3 mm), and hazelnuts (3/3 mm). A native prick by prick test with sunflower seeds was strongly positive (8/5 mm). Elevated concentrations of specific IgE against weed mix (inc. lenscale, mugwort, ragweed) allergens (1.04 IU/mL), Artemisia vulgaris (1.36 IU/mL), and Artemisia absinthium (0.49 IU/mL) were found. An ImmunoCap ISAC test found an average level of specific IgE against mugwort pollen allergen component Art v 1 -5,7 ISU-E, indicating an allergy to mugwort pollen and low to medium levels of specific IgE against lipid transfer proteins (LTP) found in walnuts, peanuts, mugwort pollen, and hazelnuts. Through the ISAC inhibition test we proved that sunflower seed allergen extracts contain proteins cross-reactive with patients' IgE specific to Art v 1, Art v 3, and Jug r 3. Based on our results and the clinical pattern of the disease we confirmed that the patient is allergic to mugwort pollen and that he had an anaphylactic reaction as a result of ingesting sunflower seeds. We suspected that hypersensitivity to sunflower LTP and defensin-like proteins, both cross-reactive with mugwort pollen allergens, were the main cause of the patient's anaphylactic reaction.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.