Page 68 - Portuguese Journal - SPORL - Vol 61. Nº1
P. 68

Six months after IT, there was a reduction in     that  this  method  was  as  useful,  specific,
          patients’ symptoms (nasal, ocular, and lung       sensitive, and reproducible as testing with a
          symptoms) and use of emergency medica-            single allergen, as well as less time-consuming.
          tion, as well as a greater tolerance to allergens   In addition, they  demonstrated  that NAPTm
          and improved quality of life. The success of IT   is in total agreement with the results of
          in LAR is associated with an increase in the se-  the  NAPT  and is  safe,  with  no exacerbated
          rum levels of specific IgG  and a decrease in     inflammatory  response  compared  to  the
                                    4
          IgE in the nasal secretions.  However, it has not   NAPT. In a previous study by Wierzbicki et al. ,
                                                                                                        25
          been reported whether the use of IT in LAR        in which a panel of multiple allergens was also
          modifies the clinical course of the disease .     used in the NAPT for the diagnosis of LAR in
                                                   16
                                                            patients  initially  classified  as  perennial  NAR,
          Discussion                                        there were seven false positive results. These
          The diagnosis of AR is based on the clinical      discordant results may be explained by the
          history, positive response in SPT, and positive   use of a different control solution (may trigger
          serum  specific  IgE.  However,  a  structured    a nasal irritant response) or by the fact that the
          clinical  history along with directed sIgE        test was performed in only one nasal cavity.
          increases the diagnostic precision in AR,         Some allergen solutions contain preservatives
          compared with clinical history alone.             that react with the nasal mucosa and it is thus
          However,  this diagnostic approach does not       essential to have control by conducting a test
          allow the diagnosis of LAR in which the SPT       with the dilution solution in the nasal mucosa
          and sIgE are negative, and it is thus necessary   to exclude nasal hyperreactivity .
                                                                                           19
          to perform the NAPT . The fact that the           On the other hand, in their protocol, Wierzbicki
                                 2-6
          patients diagnosed with LAR already have an       et al.  also used a concentration of allergen
                                                                 25
          extended follow-up and monitoring period,         (namely D. pteronyssinnus) lower than that
          without progression to AR, supports the           recommended to trigger a positive response
          notion that LAR is a separate entity from AR,     in the nasal mucosa. Although NAPTm is
          despite the similar symptoms and therapeutic      essential for the diagnosis of patients with
          response .  Some authors advocate IgE testing     LAR  who  are  mono-  and  polysensitized  to
                   8
          in nasal secretions during natural exposure to    allergens,  it  is not possible  to  measure  the
          allergens or after the NAPT because the in vitro   intensity of the nasal allergic response. This is
          detection of sIgE has high specificity, despite   only possible through a NAPT with a gradual
          having  low sensitivity (between  22% and         increase in the concentration of the allergen
          40%). Its low sensitivity may be explained by     administered during the provocation until a
          the effect of dilution, a non-specific response   target concentration that triggers the allergy
          to  house  mites,  or  other  not  yet  identified   symptoms is reached .
                                                                                 3-4
          factors . Given its low sensitivity, IgE detection   For the evaluation of the response to NAPT,
                8
          in nasal secretions is not a good method          several scales exist that facilitate the subjective
          for the diagnosis of LAR and is reserved for      assessment of allergy symptoms.
          research purposes 3-4,16 .                        The  classification  of  the  response  may
          The NAPT is a very useful diagnostic tool as it is   be  based on  the  patient’s  report  of  nasal
          more sensitive than other diagnostic methods      symptoms, such as the Likert scale (0 –
          such as the detection of sIgE, tryptase, ECP,     none, 1 – mild, 2 – moderate, 3 – severe) or
          or the basophil activation test, although its     the visual analogue scale (VAS) may be used
          execution is time consuming .                     for reporting the severity of the symptoms
                                       3-6
          Rondón et al.   defined  a  protocol  for  the    (mild: 0-30 mm; moderate: 31-70 mm; severe:
                        15
          testing of several allergens in a single session   71-100 mm). The Total Nasal Symptom Score
          (NAPTm), using a panel of four allergens most     (TNSS) is a scale that assesses four symptoms
          commonly  involved in  LAR. They  concluded       (rhinorrhea, nasal congestion, sneezing, and



      68  Portuguese Journal of Otorhinolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery
   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73