How reliable is anamnestic data in predicting the clinical relevance of house dust mite sensitization?

xlomafota13 shared this article with you from Inoreader How reliable is anamnestic data in predicting the clinical relevance of house dust mite sensitization? Via http://link.springer.com/journal/405,European archives of oto-rhino-laryngology,The European Federation of Oto-Rhino-Laryngological Societies (EUFOS) : affiliated with the German Society for Oto-Rhino Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2021 May 21. doi: 10.1007/s00405-021-06862-x. Online ahead of print. ABSTRACT PURPOSE: For perennial inhalant allergens such as house dust mite (HDM), the German guideline on allergen-specific immunotherapy explicitly recommends provocation testing. This procedure is time-consuming, expensive, and potentially dangerous for the patient. Recently it has been discussed whether provocation tests are really necessary for diagnosing allergy to Dermatophagoides species. Thus, our study aimed to analyze the concordance between nasal provocation tests with Dermatophagoides species and anamnestic data. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the concordance between patients' histories including self-reported symptom scores and the results of provocation testing in 471 individuals with proven sensitization to Dermatophagoides species. RESULTS: 248 patients had a positive nasal provocation test (NPT) result to D ermatophagoides species and 223 individuals a negative NPT result. Patients allergic to HSM suffered significantly more often from atopic dermatitis (14% vs. 7%, p = 0.046) and more from asthma (20% vs. 19%, p = 0.851). Moreover, individuals with clinically silent sensitization complained less about nasal secretion (37% vs. 45%, p = 0.244) but significantly more about nasal dryness (46% vs. 34%, p = 0.046) whereas rates of nasal airway obstruction, ocular complaints and sleep quality were comparable in both groups. Allergic patients reported more often perennial (34% vs. 30%, p = 0.374) and location-dependent (39% vs. 31%, p = 0.090) symptoms. However, the discrepant prevalence of atopic dermatitis was the only statistically significant difference between both groups. CONCLUSION: Despite slight differences between both patient groups, clinical data are not sufficient to distinguish between silent sensitization and clinically relevant allergic rhinitis to HDM. Therefore, nasal provocation testing remains the gold standard for assessing clinical relevance in patients sensitized to Dermatophagoides species. PMID:34019148 | DOI:10.1007/s00405-021-06862-x View on the web Inoreader. Take back control of your news feed. Follow us on Twitter and Facebook.