ReviewClinical and translational allergy2025
Optimizing Adrenaline Administration in Anaphylaxis: Clinical Practice Considerations and Safety Insights.
Review in Clinical and translational allergy, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Epinephrine Underuse for Anaphylaxis in Infants and Toddlers: A Practical Review for Pediatricians.Paediatric drugs · 2026Review
- Novelties in the pragmatic management of anaphylaxis in pediatric age.European journal of pediatrics · 2026Review
- Expert consensus recommendations for the prevention and management of immunoglobulin therapy-related adverse reactions in primary and secondary immunodeficiencies: a national Delphi study from the Immunodeficiency Group of the Spanish Society of Immunology.Frontiers in immunology · 2026Article
- Optimizing Adrenaline Administration in Anaphylaxis: Clinical Practice Considerations and Safety Insights.Clinical and translational allergy · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAnaphylaxis is an acute, severe, and potentially fatal reaction marked by the fast onset of symptoms and organ involvement that may lead to death from vascular collapse or airway obstruction. Despite adrenaline (epinephrine) being the first-line medication for reversing anaphylactic symptoms, misconceptions about its safe and correct use persist and lead to improper administration.
methodsThis review provides a comprehensive overview of clinical use of adrenaline autoinjectors (AAIs) in the management of anaphylaxis, key safety considerations, and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile of three of the currently marketed AAIs.
resultsWhen administered intramuscularly (IM) at the recommended dose for anaphylaxis, adrenaline is considered safe; however, adequate training in emergency care is essential to minimize dosage errors and mitigate safety risks. In specific situations, such as refractory anaphylaxis, intravenous (IV) administration is advised under specialized settings due to the potential risk of severe cardiovascular complications that can result from dosing errors.
conclusionAlthough adrenaline can cause mild and transient side effects even when administered correctly at the recommended dosage, the potential side effects should not deter its use in critical situations such as anaphylaxis. This review aims to highlight the role of AAIs in improving patient outcomes during anaphylactic emergencies.
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.