ArticleJA clinical reports2024
Causative agent for perioperative anaphylaxis in a child with autism successfully identified using the intradermal test under general anesthesia.
Article in JA clinical reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Five years of experience with skin testing for perioperative anaphylaxis: diagnostic challenges and the need for updated guidelines.Journal of anesthesia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe skin-prick and intradermal tests are the main diagnostic methods used to identify the causative agent in patients with suspected perioperative anaphylaxis. Although the intradermal test is more sensitive than the skin-prick test, multiple intradermal injections can be painful for children. Here, we present the case of a child with autism and suspected perioperative anaphylaxis. The causative agent was successfully identified using the intradermal test under general anesthesia. CASE PRESENTATION: An 8-year-old boy with autism developed anaphylaxis during general anesthesia for the fourth cleft lip and palate surgery. An allergic workout was performed, but both the skin-prick and basophil activation tests for suspected causative agents yielded negative results. The patient was afraid of multiple injections, and an intradermal test was performed under general anesthesia by anesthesiologists and allergists. Piperacillin was confirmed as the causative agent, and subsequent surgery using the same anesthetic agents without piperacillin was uneventful.
conclusionsConcerted efforts should be made to identify the causative agent for diagnosing perioperative anaphylaxis.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.