Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35141465›Full record

ReviewAllergologie select2022

Patients with questionable penicillin (beta-lactam) allergy: Causes and solutions.

Knut Brockow, Gerda Wurpts, Axel Trautmann

Open access · greenAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Allergologie select, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
4.2field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed, 26 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Candent issues in pneumonia. Reflections from the Fifth Annual Meeting of Spanish Experts 2023.Revista espanola de quimioterapia : publicacion oficial de la Sociedad Espanola de Quimioterapia · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Knut BrockowDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology Biederstein, Faculty of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich.
Gerda WurptsClinic for Dermatology and Allergology, Aachen Comprehensive Allergy Center (ACAC), University Hospital of RWTH Aachen, and.
Axel TrautmannDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, Allergy Center Mainfranken, University Hospital Würzburg, Germany.
RWTH Aachen University · DETechnical University of Munich · DEUniversitätsklinikum Würzburg · DE

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundIn Europe, North America, and Australia, 5% to 10% of the population are now classified as penicillin (β-lactam) allergic. Only ~ 10% of these questionable diagnoses, mostly made in childhood, can be confirmed by allergy diagnostics. MATERIALS AND

methodsThe aim of this review is to show causes and consequences as well as recommendations for dealing with the often questionable diagnosis of penicillin (β-lactam) allergy (BLA).

resultsAn incorrect BLA diagnosis may negatively impact antibiotic treatment needed in the future, by using a less effective antibiotic or using a broad-spectrum antibiotic, for example, further exacerbating the problem of increasing antibiotic resistance. Accordingly, there is growing pressure from antibiotic stewardship programs to critically challenge the BLA diagnosis. Conservatively, a suspected BLA is reviewed by an allergist using medical history, skin testing, laboratory testing, and provocation. This clarification is costly and is not remunerated in the German health care system; that is the reason why this testing is only offered in a few specialized clinics and practically not at all in general practice. In view of thousands of affected patients, additional strategies are needed to treat patients with a low risk of hypersensitivity reaction despite suspected allergy with a β-lactam antibiotic. In recent years, various methods have been proposed to eliminate suspected allergy as promptly as possible and directly before necessary treatment with a β-lactam antibiotic, including standardized history (also in the form of an algorithm), skin test with immediate reading after 15 minutes, or administration of a small test dose. Investigations of small case series and also multi-center studies to date have yielded promising results in terms of feasibility and safety.

conclusionOf the large number of patients with (questionable) BLA, most have never been tested and - if antibiotic treatment becomes necessary - simply receive an alternative antibiotic. The diagnosis of BLA therefore requires new approaches besides classical allergy testing to critically question BLA.

Indexed as

allergyallergy diagnosticsdelabelinglabelingpenicillinβ-lactam allergyβ-lactam-antibiotics

Identifiers

PMID35141465
PMCPMC8822521
OpenAlexW4210550744

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.