[Covid-19 vaccination and risk of anaphylaxis - Recommendations for practical management].
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Worm M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7814269 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
[Covid-19 vaccination and risk of anaphylaxis - Recommendations for practical management].
Worm Margitta M Ring Johannes J Klimek Ludger L Jakob Thilo T Lange Lars L Treudler Regina R Beyer Kirsten K Werfel Thomas T Biedermann Tilo T Bircher Andreas A Fischer Matthias M Fuchs Thomas T Heller Axel R AR Hoffmann Florian F Huttegger Isidor I Kopp Matthias Volkmar MV Kugler Claudia C Lommatzsch Marek M Pfaar Oliver O Rietschel Ernst E Rueff Franziska F Schnadt Sabine S Seifert Roland R Stöcker Britta B Vogelberg Christian C Sitter Helmut H Gieler Uwe U Brockow Knut K
MMW Fortschritte der Medizin 20210101 1
Similar Datasets
Project description:During the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, guidelines have been issued by international, national and local authorities to address management and the need for preparedness. Children with COVID-19 differ from adults in that they are less often and less severely affected. Additional precautions required in the management of children address their increased radiosensitivity, need for accompanying carers, and methods for dealing with children in a mixed adult-paediatric institution. In this guidance document, our aim is to define a pragmatic strategy for imaging children with an emphasis on proven or suspected COVID-19 cases. Children suspected of COVID-19 should not be imaged routinely. Imaging should be performed only when expected to alter patient management, depending on symptoms, preexisting conditions and clinical evolution. In order to prevent disease transmission, it is important to manage the inpatient caseload effectively by triaging children and carers outside the hospital, re-scheduling nonurgent elective procedures and managing symptomatic children and carers as COVID-19 positive until proven otherwise. Within the imaging department one should consider conducting portable examinations with COVID-19 machines or arranging dedicated COVID-19 paediatric imaging sessions and performing routine nasopharyngeal swab testing before imaging under general anaesthesia. Finally, regular personal hygiene, appropriate usage of personal protective equipment, awareness of which procedures are considered aerosol generating and information on how to best disinfect imaging machinery after examinations should be highlighted to all staff members.
| S-EPMC7332738 | biostudies-literature
Project description:AIM:To compile recommendations and evidence on the practical management of pregnant women with COVIC-19 in order to clarify standards of obstetric care in the face of this new disease. METHODS:Scoping review based on literaature searches in national and international health science databases (Pubmed/Medline, Biblioteca virtual en salud (BVS), Scielo, COCHRANE and CUIDEN) and websites, and additionally by a "snowball" system. MeSH terms were used: "COVID-19", "Pregnancy", "Delivery, Obstetric" "Pregnant Women" and "Maternal". As limits in the search Spanish and English languages were selected. No limits were established in relation to the year of publication or type of article. RESULTS:A total of 49 documents and articles were detected, of which 27 were analyzed, 18 were used, and 9 were discarded because they did not contain practical recommendations. The recommendations were grouped into 9 subjects: Prevention of infection in pregnant women, Prevention of infection in health care personnel attending pregnant women, Form of presentation and severity in pregnant women, Maternal-fetal transmission (vertical and perinatal), Maternal-fetal control of the pregnant woman infected with COVID-19, Control of the severely pregnant woman with COVID-19, Treatment of the pregnant woman with COVID-19, Management and route of termination of labor, Neonatal outcomes in women with COVID-19 and Breastfeeding. CONCLUSIONS:Lack of strong evidence to support many of the recommendations for pregnant women with COVID-19, as they are based on previous experience with SARS-CoV and MERS-CoV infections. Further studies are needed to confirm the appropriateness of many of the recommendations and guidelines for action in the specific case of pregnant women and COVIC-19.
| S-EPMC7231730 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC11225828 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPolyethylene glycol (PEG) may elicit anaphylaxis to COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, and guidance for patients at risk is needed.MethodsIn retrospective patients with PEG allergy collected from 2006 till 2019, clinical, skin, and basophil activation test (BAT) characteristics discriminative for PEG allergy were analyzed and compared with the literature. In 421 prospective real-life patients asking for allergy workup for COVID-19 vaccine hypersensitivity in 2020/2021, risk assessment was performed and tolerance of the recommended vaccination approach was assessed.ResultsTen patients with PEG allergy were found in the retrospective cohort. Patients reacted with immediate anaphylaxis (100%) not only to PEG-based laxatives/bowel preparations or injections, but also to cold medication, antiseptics, analgetics, or antibiotics. Skin tests ± BAT with PEG ± elicitors were positive in 10/10. Provocation tests were positive in 7/9 patients. From the prospective cohort, 370/421 patients self-reporting increased risk for vaccine allergy lacked criteria necessitating allergy workup and were recommended for routine vaccination. A total of 51/421 patients were tested, and three (6%) with PEG allergy were identified, whereas 48 patients remained negative in skin tests. Vaccination was recommended in all those patients. No hypersensitivity reactions were reported to vaccination including six PEG-allergic patients tolerating COVID-19 vaccination.ConclusionsTaking a detailed history excluded PEG allergy in most referred patients and enabled direct safe vaccination. Immediate urticaria/anaphylaxis to typical elicitors identified patients requiring PEG allergy workup. Skin tests ± BAT identified PEG allergy and helped to select the vaccine and the vaccination approach. Even PEG-allergic patients can tolerate COVID-19 vaccines.
| S-EPMC9011687 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC7204685 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), induced by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, is responsible for a global pandemic following widespread transmission and death. Several vaccines have been developed to counter this public health crisis using both novel and conventional methods. Following approval based on promising efficacy and safety data, the AstraZeneca, Janssen, Moderna, Pfizer/BioNTech, and Sinovac vaccines have been administered globally among different populations with various reported side effects. Reports of life-threatening anaphylaxis following administration were of particular concern for both health care providers and the public. A systematic literature search using PubMed, Embase, Scopus, Web of Science, Science Direct, MedRxiv, and Lens.org databases identified relevant studies reporting anaphylaxis following vaccine administration. This systematic review includes 41 studies reporting anaphylaxis. A total of 7942 cases, including 43 deaths, were reported across 14 countries. Most cases occurred following the administration of the first dose. Importantly, the benefits of vaccination outweigh the risks of anaphylaxis. Subsequently, as populations continue to get vaccinated, it is important for health care providers to be able to recognize individuals at risk of developing anaphylaxis. Furthermore, they must be familiar with both the clinical hallmarks and treatment of anaphylactic reactions to minimize long-term sequalae and prevent death in vaccinated individuals.
| S-EPMC9349886 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The spread of the COVID-19 pandemic has imposed significant challenges on healthcare provision, requiring changes in the conventional patient management, particularly in chronic diseases like multiple sclerosis (MS). To increase patient safety and reduce the risk of infection, while ensuring an appropriate and regular follow-up, tele-medicine gained prominence as a valid alternative to face-to-face appointments. However, the urgency of the implementation and the lack of experience in most MS centers led to "ad hoc" and extremely diverse approaches, which now merit to be standardized and refined. Indeed, while tele-consultation cannot fully replace face-to-face visits, it certainly can, and will, be incorporated as part of the routine care of MS patients in the near future. Bearing this in mind, the Portuguese Multiple Sclerosis Study Group (GEEM) has developed a set of recommendations for the usage of tele-medicine in the management of MS patients, both during the pandemic and in the future. The consensus was obtained through a two-step modified Delphi methodology, resulting in 15 recommendations, which are detailed in the manuscript.
| S-EPMC8006454 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9083305 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe sensation of throat closure after vaccination is concerning for anaphylaxis and leads to vaccine hesitancy.ObjectivesWe characterized patients who developed laryngopharyngeal symptoms (LPhS) after coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccination and assessed risk factors for these symptoms.MethodsThe study analyzed data from the COVID-19 vaccines adverse reactions registry (December 14, 2020, to June 13, 2022). Outcomes included the incidence of postvaccination LPhS and use of epinephrine. We identified and compared risk factors for COVID-19 postvaccination reactions between subjects with and without LPhS.ResultsA total of 158 subjects were enrolled onto the registry. LPhS were reported in 61 subjects (38.6%), of whom 52 (85.2%) received a subsequent dose. With initial vaccination, the use of epinephrine was higher in subjects with LPhS (20%) compared to those without (6%; P = .0094). Fifty-two subjects (85.2%) with LPhS received a subsequent COVID-19 vaccine dose with milder or no symptoms, and none needed treatment with epinephrine. Those with LPhS were more likely to have a history of drug allergies (P = .02), severe medication allergies (P = .03), gastroesophageal reflux disease (P = .018), and need for antireflux medications (P = .0085) compared to controls.ConclusionsIn our registry, postvaccination LPhS were common. LPhS can mimic anaphylaxis and lead to more frequent use of epinephrine. Gastroesophageal reflux disease was more frequent in these subjects. Patients with subjective throat closure sensation can safely receive subsequent vaccine doses with close observation and reassurance. LPhS are not unique to COVID-19 vaccines. Patient and provider education regarding the role of gastroesophageal reflux disease as a risk factor for LPhS with vaccination can improve vaccine uptake.
| S-EPMC10654026 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9023104 | biostudies-literature