The surgical implications of latex sensitivity in children with spina bifida.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to L A Mostello.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
We attempted to determine the prevalence and clinical significance of rubber-specific IgE in a prospective case control study of 32 preoperative children with spina bifida, compared with 45 outpatient controls and 35 age-matched preoperative controls without spina bifida. A latex-specific radioallergosorbent test was positive in 11 of the 32 spina bifida patients (34%), compared with 1 (2%) and 4 (11%) of the respective controls (p less than 0.05). Within the spina bifida group 5 of 11 antibody-positive patients had a history of rubber-associated, intraoperative or otherwise idiopathic allergic episodes and 1 of 21 antibody-negative patients gave such a history (p = 0.012). Children with spina bifida have a significantly greater likelihood than controls of having IgE specific for rubber antigens. In addition, the presence of rubber-specific IgE is associated with a higher frequency of rubber-associated, intraoperative or idiopathic allergic reactions.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Seven patients with type I hypersensitivity reactions to rubber are reported. Radioallergosorbent testing with crude latex antigen was positive in 6/7 patients. Five patients had coexisting spina bifida, and all had undergone surgery before the development of rubber allergy. Rubber allergy is a new phenomenon that should be in the differential diagnosis of idiopathic anaphylaxis and urticaria.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
We interviewed 93 consecutive children with spina bifida who were scheduled for operation to document (a) the prevalence of latex sensitivity, (b) predictors of anaphylactic reaction, and (c) the risk of type I hypersensitivity reaction perioperatively. Of these patients, 9.7% were clinically allergic. Radioallergosorbent testing (RAST) was 89% sensitive. All patients with known latex allergy were premedicated, and rigorous efforts were made to avoid latex exposure. No intraoperative anaphylactic reactions were noted. One postoperative reaction occurred in a history-positive, RAST-negative patient. We conclude that operation can be performed safely in patients with latex allergy.