This evidence- and consensus-based guideline was developed following the methods recommended by Cochrane and the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) working group. The conference was held on 1 December 2016. It is a joint initiative of the Dermatology Section of the European Academy of Allergology and Clinical Immunology (EAACI), the EU-founded network of excellence, the Global Allergy and Asthma European Network (GA²LEN), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF) and the World Allergy Organization (WAO) with the participation of 48 delegates of 42 national and international societies. This guideline was acknowledged and accepted by the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS). Urticaria is a frequent, mast cell-driven disease, presenting with wheals, angioedema, or both. The lifetime prevalence for acute urticaria is approximately 20%. Chronic spontaneous urticaria and other chronic forms of urticaria are disabling, impair quality of life and affect performance at work and school. This guideline covers the definition and classification of urticaria, taking into account the recent progress in identifying its causes, eliciting factors and pathomechanisms. In addition, it outlines evidence-based diagnostic and therapeutic approaches for the different subtypes of urticaria.

Hereditary Angioedema (HAE) is a rare and disabling disease. Early diagnosis and appropriate therapy are essential. This update and revision of the global guideline for HAE provides up‐to‐date consensus recommendations for the management of HAE. In the development of this update and revision of the guideline, an international expert panel reviewed the existing evidence and developed 20 recommendations that were discussed, finalized and consented during the guideline consensus conference in June 2016 in Vienna. The final version of this update and revision of the guideline incorporates the contributions of a board of expert reviewers and the endorsing societies. The goal of this guideline update and revision is to provide clinicians and their patients with guidance that will assist them in making rational decisions in the management of HAE with deficient C1‐inhibitor (type 1) and HAE with dysfunctional C1‐inhibitor (type 2). The key clinical questions covered by these recommendations are: (1) How should HAE‐1/2 be defined and classified?, (2) How should HAE‐1/2 be diagnosed?, (3) Should HAE‐1/2 patients receive prophylactic and/or on‐demand treatment and what treatment options should be used?, (4) Should HAE‐1/2 management be different for special HAE‐1/2 patient groups such as pregnant/lactating women or children?, and (5) Should HAE‐1/2 management incorporate self‐administration of therapies and patient support measures?

BackgroundWe published the Canadian 2003 International Consensus Algorithm for the Diagnosis, Therapy, and Management of Hereditary Angioedema (HAE; C1 inhibitor [C1-INH] deficiency) and updated this as Hereditary angioedema: a current state-of-the-art review: Canadian Hungarian 2007 International Consensus Algorithm for the Diagnosis, Therapy, and Management of Hereditary Angioedema.ObjectiveTo update the International Consensus Algorithm for the Diagnosis, Therapy and Management of Hereditary Angioedema (circa 2010).MethodsThe Canadian Hereditary Angioedema Network (CHAEN)/Réseau Canadien d'angioédème héréditaire (RCAH) http://www.haecanada.com and cosponsors University of Calgary and the Canadian Society of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (with an unrestricted educational grant from CSL Behring) held our third Conference May 15th to 16th, 2010 in Toronto Canada to update our consensus approach. The Consensus document was reviewed at the meeting and then circulated for review.ResultsThis manuscript is the 2010 International Consensus Algorithm for the Diagnosis, Therapy and Management of Hereditary Angioedema that resulted from that conference.ConclusionsConsensus approach is only an interim guide to a complex disorder such as HAE and should be replaced as soon as possible with large phase III and IV clinical trials, meta analyses, and using data base registry validation of approaches including quality of life and cost benefit analyses, followed by large head-to-head clinical trials and then evidence-based guidelines and standards for HAE disease management.

No abstract