Background. Latex allergy is one of the major health concerns and allergic reactions to latex may be serious and fatal. Purpose. In this study, we sought to determine the frequency of latex hypersensitivity in a group of allergic Egyptian infants and children and its relation to the history provided by the patients or caregivers. Methods. We consecutively enrolled 400 patients with physician diagnosed allergic diseases. The study measurements included clinical evaluation for the site and duration of allergy, history suggestive of latex allergy, family history of allergy, and skin prick testing (SPT) using a commercial latex extract. Results. The study revealed that 16/400 (4%) patients had positive SPT; 11 of them only had positive history of sensitivity to latex. Positive latex SPT was reported in 3.4% (11/326) of patients with bronchial asthma, 5.9% (7/118) of patients with skin allergy, and 4.5% (2/44) of patients with allergic rhinitis. SPT was positive in 7.4% (4/54) of patients with concomitant respiratory and skin allergy. Latex SPT was more specific than sensitive (97.69% and 77.77%, resp.) with a negative predictive value of 99.47%. Conclusion. Although underrecognized, latex is an important allergen in the pediatric age group with a sensitization frequency of 4% among allergic children. It was observed to be especially associated with multiple allergic diseases coexisting in the same patient. Pediatric allergologists should educate their patients on latex allergy and encourage the use of latex-free products. 1. Introduction Latex as found in nature is a milky sap-like fluid found in 10% of all flowering plants [1]. Natural rubber latex (NRL) extracted from Hevea brasiliensis tree has been widely used in the manufacturing of gloves, balloons, and parts of medical and dental equipment [2]. Among more than 200 polypeptides identified in NRL as potential allergens, Hevea brasiliensis 6 [Hev 6] and Hev b1-13 are recognized as the primary allergens by the International Union of Immunological Societies [3]. Latex elongation factor Hev d1 is the relevant allergen in patients with spina bifida. Prohevein (Hev B6) behaves as a major allergen, since it reacts to IgE in most of the sera of patients with latex allergy [4]. Exposure to latex via direct skin contact or inhalation of airborne allergens from powdered gloves poses the risk of sensitizing both clinicians and their patients. The risk of developing latex hypersensitivity increases with prolonged and repeated exposure [5]. Latex sensitization is defined as the presence of immunoglobulin antibodies
References
[1]
A. A. Agrawal and K. Konno, “Latex: a model for understanding mechanisms, ecology, and evolution of plant defense against herbivory,” Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, vol. 40, pp. 311–331, 2009.
[2]
W. F. P. Neves-Junior, C. F. O. de Graeff, M. Ferreira, M. Mulato, M. S. Bernardes, and J. Coutinho-Netto, “Elastic properties of natural rubber tubes produced by dip-coating,” Journal of Applied Polymer Science, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 702–707, 2006.
[3]
J. M. Rolland and R. E. O'Hehir, “Latex allergy: a model for therapy,” Clinical & Experimental Allergy, vol. 38, no. 6, pp. 898–912, 2008.
[4]
A. Sanchez Palacios, “Latex allergy: diagnosis and therapeutic aspects,” Allergologia et Immunopathologia, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 212–221, 2001.
[5]
T. Kean and M. McNaiiy, “Latex hypersensitivity: a closer look at considerations for dentistry,” Journal of the Canadian Dental Association, vol. 75, no. 4, pp. 279–282, 2009.
[6]
R. Cremer, M. Lorbacher, F. Hering, and R. Engelskirchen, “Natural rubber latex sensitisation and allergy in patients with spina bifida, urogenital disorders and oesophageal atresia compared with a normal paediatric population,” European Journal of Pediatric Surgery, vol. 17, no. 3, pp. 194–198, 2007.
[7]
S. G. O. Johansson, J. O. Hourihane, J. Bousquet et al., “A revised nomenclature for allergy. An EAACI position statement from the EAACI nomenclature task force,” Allergy: European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, vol. 56, no. 9, pp. 813–824, 2001.
[8]
O. Gülbahar, E. Demir, N. Mete et al., “Latex allergy and associated risk factors in a group of Turkish patients with spina bifida,” Turkish Journal of Pediatrics, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 226–231, 2004.
[9]
C. Radauer, F. Adhami, I. Fürtler, et al., “Latex-allergic patients sensitized to the major allergen hevein and hevein-like domains of class I chitinases show no increased frequency of latex-associated plant food allergy,” Molecular Immunology, vol. 48, no. 4, pp. 600–609, 2011.
[10]
S. M. Pollart, C. Warniment, and T. Mori, “Latex allergy,” American Family Physician, vol. 80, no. 12, pp. 1413–1420, 2009.
[11]
G. Karakaya and A. F. Kalyoncu, “The natural course of atopy determined by skin prick tests in patients with bronchial asthma and/or rhinitis,” Allergologia et Immunopathologia, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 257–262, 2006.
[12]
ATS (American Thoracic Society), “Guidelines for the evaluation of impairment disability in asthmatics,” The American Review of Respiratory Disease, vol. 147, no. 4, pp. 1056–1061, 1993.
[13]
J. Bousquet, N. Khaltaev, A. A. Cruz, et al., “Allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma (ARIA) 2008 update,” Allergy, vol. 63, supplement s86, pp. 8–160, 2008.
[14]
J. F. Stalder, A. Taieb, D. J. Atherton et al., “Severity scoring of atopic dermatitis: the SCORAD index. Consensus report of the European Task Force on Atopic Dermatitis,” Dermatology, vol. 186, no. 1, pp. 23–31, 1993.
[15]
T. Zuberbier and M. Maurer, “Urticaria: current opinions about etiology, diagnosis and therapy,” Acta Dermato-Venereologica, vol. 87, no. 3, pp. 169–205, 2007.
[16]
O. Bayrou, “Latex allergy,” Revue du Praticien, vol. 56, no. 3, pp. 289–295, 2006.
[17]
E. Novembre, R. Bernardini, I. Brizzi et al., “The prevalence of latex allergy in children seen in a university hospital allergy clinic,” Allergy: European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, vol. 52, no. 1, pp. 101–105, 1997.
[18]
V. B. Jensen, I. M. J？rgensen, K. B. Rasmussen, and P. Prahl, “The prevalence of latex sensitisation and allergy in Danish atopic children: evaluation of diagnostic methods,” Danish Medical Bulletin, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 260–262, 2002.
[19]
H. Kimata, “Increased incidence of latex allergy in children with allergic diseases in Japan,” Public Health, vol. 119, no. 12, pp. 1145–1149, 2005.
[20]
P. Meglio, E. Arabito, M. Plantamura, and L. Businco, “Prevalence of latex allergy and evaluation of some risk factors in a population of atopic children,” Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 250–256, 2002.
[21]
E. Nettis, G. Micale, M. Fanelli, et al., “Atopy and risk factors for latex sensitization in a selected population,” Allergy and Asthma Proceedings, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 185–191, 2003.
[22]
A. Jorge, F. Lorente, and L. Taborda-Barata, “Prevalence of latex sensitization and allergy in Portuguese children,” Pediatric Allergy and Immunology, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 466–473, 2006.
[23]
G. Roberts, G. Lack, K. Northstone, and J. Golding, “Prevalence of latex allergy in the community at age 7 years,” Clinical & Experimental Allergy, vol. 35, no. 3, pp. 299–300, 2005.
[24]
R. Bernardini, N. Pucci, C. Azzari, E. Novembre, M. De Martino, and M. Milani, “Sensitivity and specificity of different skin prick tests with latex extracts in pediatric patients with suspected natural rubber latex allergy—a cohort study,” Pediatric Allergy and Immunology, vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 315–318, 2008.
[25]
F. di Stefano, S. Siriruttanapruk, J. McCoach, M. di Gioacchino, and P. S. Surge, “Occupational asthma in a highly industrialized region of UK: report from a local surveillance scheme,” European Annals of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 56–62, 2004.
[26]
O. Vandenplas, A. Larbanois, F. Vanassche et al., “Latex-induced occupational asthma: time trend in incidence and relationship with hospital glove policies,” Allergy: European Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, vol. 64, no. 3, pp. 415–420, 2009.
[27]
B. Hoffmann-Petersen, A. H？st, K. Toksvig Larsen et al., “Prevalence of IgE sensitization in Danish children with suspected asthma,” Pediatric Allergy and Immunology, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 727–733, 2013.
[28]
L. K. Airaksinen, T. O. Tuomi, M. O. Tuppurainen, A. I. Lauerma, and E. M. Toskala, “Inhalation challenge test in the diagnosis of occupational rhinitis,” The American Journal of Rhinology, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 38–46, 2008.
[29]
K. K. B. Clemmensen, T. K. Car？e, S. F. Thomsen, N. E. Ebbeh？j, and T. Agner, “Two-year follow-up survey of patients with allergic contact dermatitis from an occupational cohort: is the prognosis dependent on the omnipresence of the allergen?” British Journal of Dermatology, vol. 170, no. 5, pp. 1100–1105, 2014.
[30]
Z. A. El-Sayed, K. S. Awwaad, M. Z. Mahran, and H. El-Sakka, “Latex hypersensitivity among Egyptian children at risk,” British Medical Journal Middle East, vol. 6, no. 61, pp. 7–10, 1999.
[31]
G. Spartà, M. J. Kemper, A. C. Gerber, P. Goetschel, and T. J. Neuhaus, “Latex allergy in children with urological malformation and chronic renal failure,” Journal of Urology, vol. 171, no. 4, pp. 1647–1649, 2004.
[32]
A. Bueno de Sá, R. Faria Camilo Araujo, S. Cavalheiro, M. Carvalho Mallozi, and D. Solé, “Profile of latex sensitization and allergies in children and adolescents with myelomeningocele in S？o Paulo, Brazil,” Journal of Investigational Allergology and Clinical Immunology, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 43–49, 2013.
