ReviewPostepy dermatologii i alergologii2026
Challenges in the diagnosis and treatment of chronic urticaria.
Review in Postepy dermatologii i alergologii, 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
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Chronic urticaria (CU) is a multifactorial inflammatory skin disorder characterised by heterogeneous clinical manifestations, unclear aetiology, and significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Aim: The study aimed to identify the key problems that arise in the process of diagnosing and treating CU, as well as developing recommendations to improve the effectiveness of diagnostic and therapeutic approaches to this disease. Methods: The study covered the analysis of the concepts of acute and CU/chronic urticaria, their features and causes. Methods of diagnosis of CU, including clinical history, physical examination, laboratory and other tests, were addressed, and the views of other authors and their shortcomings were analysed. Treatment methods such as antihistamines, corticosteroids, psychotherapy, physiotherapy and dietary recommendations were analysed, comparing the achievements of other researchers. Results: The study established that the diagnosis of CU is complicated by the variability of clinical manifestations, the lack of specific biomarkers and difficulties in identifying triggers, and in most cases the cause of this disease remains unknown. The high prevalence of concomitant autoimmune disorders, together with the heterogeneous course of the disease, further complicates the diagnosis and selection of optimal therapy. The analysis of the main diagnostic methods demonstrated that a comprehensive approach, including clinical history, physical examination, laboratory tests, and provocative tests, is necessary to accurately establish the diagnosis. Conclusions: In the treatment of CU, the insufficient effectiveness of standard anti-allergic drugs has been found in many cases, which requires the use of alternative methods, such as biologic therapy, immunomodulators, and others. Recommendations were made to improve diagnostic and treatment methods, including improving diagnostic methods, developing new biomarkers, and using modern laboratory technologies and digital platforms to improve communication between patients and doctors. Therapy involves the use of antihistamines with possible dose increases and the use of biological agents, with an emphasis on avoiding provocative factors and psychological support for patients to improve their quality of life.
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.