RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Immunotherapy has been practiced since over a hundred years. The exact composition of the immunotherapy concentrate, with which the patient is treated, depends partly on the results of the skin prick tests applied to the allergic patient. As such, the effectiveness of the immunotherapy depends heavily on the quality of the skin prick test. The detailed recommendations for the realization of the skin prick tests have evolved and changed over the years, leading to multiple variations in its application in Mexico. OBJECTIVE: We tried to get a picture of the daily practice patterns of the members of CMICA and CoMPedIA concerning the application of skin prick tests. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Aquestionnaire was sent in various occasions to all members of the Colegio Mexicano de Inmunologia Clinica y Alergia (CMICA) and of the Colegio Mexicano de Pediatras, Especialistas en Inmunologia y Alergia (CoMPedIA). The results are presented descriptively and by calculation of the frequency/percentages of intervals of replies, in the case of numerical responses. RESULTS: A response rate of 61 (17%) was obtained of the College members, showing consistency in some replies but a wide variation in others, for example in the time certain medication has to be suspended before the execution of the skin prick test. Comparing the replies obtained with recent recommendations in international publications, some discrepancy can be detected. CONCLUSIONS: In some aspects of the survey there is coincidence of the skin test practices among the participants; however, in other items there is an important variation.
Asunto(s)
Alérgenos , Alergia e Inmunología , Pautas de la Práctica en Medicina , Pruebas Cutáneas , Humanos , MéxicoRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of nasal budesonide plus oral zafirlukast against nasal budesonide plus oral loratadine/pseudoephedrine combination in the control of symptoms of rhinitis and asthma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A controlled, clinical, randomized, double blind and crossover study was made in 36 patients with allergic rhinitis and asthma following one of the next treatment regimes: group a) nasal budesonide plus oral zafirlukast twice a day or group b) nasal budesonide plus oral loratadine/pseudoephedrine twice a day, both of them during six weeks, and two weeks of washing and crossover of the treatments during six more weeks. Changes in the rhinitis and asthma symptoms, blood eosinophils, pulmonary function testing, and nasal cytology were evaluated before and after the treatment. RESULTS: 19 patients were assigned to group a, whereas 17 patients to group b. The age ranged between 16 to 45 years, and it predominated the female group, 70 and 89%, respectively (statistically no significant). During the first six weeks of the treatment, V0 to V3, both groups of patients got better nasal symptoms but group a was superior to group b. However, in bronchial symptoms, cough, wheezing and breathlessness, group a showed efficacy in comparison with group b, where no significant improvement was shown. Once the crossover was made, from V5 to V7, there was no difference between both groups. The other evaluated indicators, such as eosinophilia, VEF1 and nasal eosinophils, had a significant improvement before and at the end of the study. CONCLUSIONS: The association of a nasal steroid with a leukotriene modifier (zafirlukast) was more effective for controlling nasal symptoms and especially bronchial symptoms than the association of a nasal steroid with antihistamines (loratadine) with pseudoephedrine. Other inflammation indicators, such as eosinophilia and nasal eosinophilia, were diminished; the VEF1 increased significantly in both treatment groups. All the above may be due to the nasal steroid use associated to a leukotriene modifier.