ArticleThe journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global2026
Prospective study of basophil activation test in suspected perioperative transfusion anaphylaxis.
Article in The journal of allergy and clinical immunology. Global, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Identifying the causative blood product in cases of suspected perioperative transfusion anaphylaxis is challenging because no confirmatory skin tests exist, and few blood-based diagnostic tests are available, potentially resulting in underreporting. Although recent studies have demonstrated the utility of the basophil activation test (BAT) for examining the causative relationship between allergic reactions and blood product transfusion, its applicability in suspected perioperative transfusion anaphylaxis remains unknown. Objective: We aimed to assess the utility of the BAT for suspected perioperative transfusion anaphylaxis cases and calculated the incidence of perioperative transfusion anaphylaxis. Methods: We prospectively performed BATs using blood products from patients with suspected transfusion anaphylaxis undergoing general anesthesia at a single hospital over 4 years. Transfusion anaphylaxis was confirmed on the basis of a positive BAT and hypersensitivity score. Results: The hypersensitivity clinical scores in all 11 patients were >8 points. BATs of blood products revealed 6 patients (55%) with positive results and dose-response curves with increasing concentrations of one blood product. These findings confirmed the diagnosis of transfusion anaphylaxis. The overall incidence of perioperative anaphylaxis due to blood products was 1/2,230, 19-fold higher than that in the 6th National Audit Project survey. The highest incidence was associated with fresh frozen plasma (1/670; 95% confidence interval, 1/2,061-1/287), followed by platelet concentrate (1/1,292; 95% confidence interval, 1/51,031-1/232). Conclusions: The BAT may help identify causative blood products in suspected perioperative transfusion anaphylaxis cases. Moreover, perioperative anaphylaxis may occur more frequently than previously reported.
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.