ArticleJournal of asthma and allergy2026
The Gap Between Suspected Local Anesthetic Allergy and Formal Diagnostic Evaluation.
Article in Journal of asthma and allergy, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Local anesthetics (LAs) are widely used, but true immune-mediated allergies are rare. Most adverse events are toxic or autonomic, yet patients are frequently mislabeled as allergic. This study aims to determine the prevalence of allergy evaluation and testing following suspected reactions to LAs. Methods: A cross-sectional retrospective study was conducted with a total of 126 patients. The study collected medical records from tertiary care hospitals in Saudi Arabia from 2016 to 2022, analyzing patients with reported allergic reactions to LA. The analysis included demographics, occurrences, medical procedure type, and allergy testing history. Results: Lidocaine was the most common agent, involved in over 90% of cases. Reactions primarily followed injections, with symptoms ranging from rash and itching to anaphylactic shock. Despite these events, only 10 patients (7.94%) were referred for further investigation. Allergy testing was performed in only three patients (2.38%). Among those tested, one was negative, while two tested positive (one for lidocaine and one for a lidocaine-bupivacaine combination). Conclusion: The study highlights a low prevalence of follow-up allergy testing despite reported adverse reactions. Systematic testing is essential to confirm or rule out true LA allergies, ensuring patient safety and identifying viable anesthetic alternatives for future procedures.
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.