Citation

Golden DBK. Curr. Opin. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 2019; ePub(ePub): ePub.

Affiliation

Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2019, Lippincott Williams and Wilkins)

DOI

10.1097/ACI.0000000000000570

PMID

31335358

Abstract

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Guidelines on insect sting allergy and venom immunotherapy (VIT) have been updated. This review describes the evolution of these guidelines and their similarities and differences. RECENT FINDINGS: The US and European guidelines show the evolution of guideline development in the grading of recommendations and the transparency of the evaluation of evidence. The US and European guidelines on VIT are similar in most areas and complimentary in others. The European guidelines are limited to VIT and are based on a published systematic review; the US practice parameters cover all areas of the diagnosis and management of insect sting allergy and do not use the Grading of Recommendation Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach.There is general agreement that both children and adults with cutaneous systemic reactions do not require VIT, and that there is minimal risk associated with β-blockers and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors during VIT. There are minor differences in the details of VIT dose, regimen, and choice of venom, but agreement on the duration and risk factors for relapse after VIT. The US and European guidelines are complementary in their discussion of the relation of mastocystosis and insect sting anaphylaxis and the value of measuring basal serum tryptase. SUMMARY: The updated guidelines on insect sting allergy from the US and European groups differ in scope, with a somewhat different focus in specific areas but are complementary overall. Where they overlap, there are relatively few differences in recommendations, and these are subtle. The US practice parameter offers an annotated algorithm for the evaluation and treatment of patients with reactions to insect stings.

Language: en