Consensus clinical scoring for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions

P. M. Hopkins, P. J. Cooke, R. C. Clarke, A. B. Guttormsen, P. R. Platt, P. Dewachter, D. G. Ebo, T. Garcez, L. H. Garvey, D. L. Hepner, D. A. Khan, H. Kolawole, P. Kopac, M. Krøigaard, J. J. Laguna, S. D. Marshall, P. M. Mertes, M. A. Rose, V. Sabato, L. C. Savic & 5 others S. Savic, T. Takazawa, G. W. Volcheck, S. Voltolini, P. H.M. Sadleir

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

2 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Grading schemes for severity of suspected allergic reactions have been applied to the perioperative setting, but there is no scoring system that estimates the likelihood that the reaction is an immediate hypersensitivity reaction. Such a score would be useful in evaluating current and proposed tests for the diagnosis of suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions and culprit agents. Methods: We conducted a Delphi consensus process involving a panel of 25 international multidisciplinary experts in suspected perioperative allergy. Items were ranked according to appropriateness (on a scale of 1–9)and consensus, which informed development of a clinical scoring system. The scoring system was assessed by comparing scores generated for a series of clinical scenarios against ratings of panel members. Supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase were generated. Results: Two rounds of the Delphi process achieved stopping criteria for all statements. From an initial 60 statements, 43 were rated appropriate (median score 7 or more)and met agreement criteria (disagreement index <0.5); these were used in the clinical scoring system. The rating of clinical scenarios supported the validity of the scoring system. Although there was variability in the interpretation of changes in mast cell tryptase by the panel, we were able to include supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase. Conclusion: We used a robust consensus development process to devise a clinical scoring system for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions. This will enable objectivity and uniformity in the assessment of the sensitivity of diagnostic tests.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)e29-e37
JournalBritish Journal of Anaesthesia
Volume123
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jul 2019

Fingerprint

Tryptases
Immediate Hypersensitivity
Consensus
Hypersensitivity
Routine Diagnostic Tests

Cite this

Hopkins, P. M. ; Cooke, P. J. ; Clarke, R. C. ; Guttormsen, A. B. ; Platt, P. R. ; Dewachter, P. ; Ebo, D. G. ; Garcez, T. ; Garvey, L. H. ; Hepner, D. L. ; Khan, D. A. ; Kolawole, H. ; Kopac, P. ; Krøigaard, M. ; Laguna, J. J. ; Marshall, S. D. ; Mertes, P. M. ; Rose, M. A. ; Sabato, V. ; Savic, L. C. ; Savic, S. ; Takazawa, T. ; Volcheck, G. W. ; Voltolini, S. ; Sadleir, P. H.M. / Consensus clinical scoring for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions. In: British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2019 ; Vol. 123, No. 1. pp. e29-e37.
@article{61ef60de01c84ed591e9f58185a6d298,
title = "Consensus clinical scoring for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions",
abstract = "Background: Grading schemes for severity of suspected allergic reactions have been applied to the perioperative setting, but there is no scoring system that estimates the likelihood that the reaction is an immediate hypersensitivity reaction. Such a score would be useful in evaluating current and proposed tests for the diagnosis of suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions and culprit agents. Methods: We conducted a Delphi consensus process involving a panel of 25 international multidisciplinary experts in suspected perioperative allergy. Items were ranked according to appropriateness (on a scale of 1–9)and consensus, which informed development of a clinical scoring system. The scoring system was assessed by comparing scores generated for a series of clinical scenarios against ratings of panel members. Supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase were generated. Results: Two rounds of the Delphi process achieved stopping criteria for all statements. From an initial 60 statements, 43 were rated appropriate (median score 7 or more)and met agreement criteria (disagreement index <0.5); these were used in the clinical scoring system. The rating of clinical scenarios supported the validity of the scoring system. Although there was variability in the interpretation of changes in mast cell tryptase by the panel, we were able to include supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase. Conclusion: We used a robust consensus development process to devise a clinical scoring system for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions. This will enable objectivity and uniformity in the assessment of the sensitivity of diagnostic tests.",
keywords = "allergy, anaesthesia, anaphylaxis, drug hypersensitivity, perioperative period, surgery",
author = "Hopkins, {P. M.} and Cooke, {P. J.} and Clarke, {R. C.} and Guttormsen, {A. B.} and Platt, {P. R.} and P. Dewachter and Ebo, {D. G.} and T. Garcez and Garvey, {L. H.} and Hepner, {D. L.} and Khan, {D. A.} and H. Kolawole and P. Kopac and M. Kr{\o}igaard and Laguna, {J. J.} and Marshall, {S. D.} and Mertes, {P. M.} and Rose, {M. A.} and V. Sabato and Savic, {L. C.} and S. Savic and T. Takazawa and Volcheck, {G. W.} and S. Voltolini and Sadleir, {P. H.M.}",
year = "2019",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1016/j.bja.2019.02.029",
language = "English",
volume = "123",
pages = "e29--e37",
journal = "British Journal of Anaesthesia",
issn = "0007-0912",
publisher = "Oxford University Press",
number = "1",

}

Hopkins, PM, Cooke, PJ, Clarke, RC, Guttormsen, AB, Platt, PR, Dewachter, P, Ebo, DG, Garcez, T, Garvey, LH, Hepner, DL, Khan, DA, Kolawole, H, Kopac, P, Krøigaard, M, Laguna, JJ, Marshall, SD, Mertes, PM, Rose, MA, Sabato, V, Savic, LC, Savic, S, Takazawa, T, Volcheck, GW, Voltolini, S & Sadleir, PHM 2019, 'Consensus clinical scoring for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions' British Journal of Anaesthesia, vol. 123, no. 1, pp. e29-e37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2019.02.029

Consensus clinical scoring for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions. / Hopkins, P. M.; Cooke, P. J.; Clarke, R. C.; Guttormsen, A. B.; Platt, P. R.; Dewachter, P.; Ebo, D. G.; Garcez, T.; Garvey, L. H.; Hepner, D. L.; Khan, D. A.; Kolawole, H.; Kopac, P.; Krøigaard, M.; Laguna, J. J.; Marshall, S. D.; Mertes, P. M.; Rose, M. A.; Sabato, V.; Savic, L. C.; Savic, S.; Takazawa, T.; Volcheck, G. W.; Voltolini, S.; Sadleir, P. H.M.

In: British Journal of Anaesthesia, Vol. 123, No. 1, 01.07.2019, p. e29-e37.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - Consensus clinical scoring for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions

AU - Hopkins, P. M.

AU - Cooke, P. J.

AU - Clarke, R. C.

AU - Guttormsen, A. B.

AU - Platt, P. R.

AU - Dewachter, P.

AU - Ebo, D. G.

AU - Garcez, T.

AU - Garvey, L. H.

AU - Hepner, D. L.

AU - Khan, D. A.

AU - Kolawole, H.

AU - Kopac, P.

AU - Krøigaard, M.

AU - Laguna, J. J.

AU - Marshall, S. D.

AU - Mertes, P. M.

AU - Rose, M. A.

AU - Sabato, V.

AU - Savic, L. C.

AU - Savic, S.

AU - Takazawa, T.

AU - Volcheck, G. W.

AU - Voltolini, S.

AU - Sadleir, P. H.M.

PY - 2019/7/1

Y1 - 2019/7/1

N2 - Background: Grading schemes for severity of suspected allergic reactions have been applied to the perioperative setting, but there is no scoring system that estimates the likelihood that the reaction is an immediate hypersensitivity reaction. Such a score would be useful in evaluating current and proposed tests for the diagnosis of suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions and culprit agents. Methods: We conducted a Delphi consensus process involving a panel of 25 international multidisciplinary experts in suspected perioperative allergy. Items were ranked according to appropriateness (on a scale of 1–9)and consensus, which informed development of a clinical scoring system. The scoring system was assessed by comparing scores generated for a series of clinical scenarios against ratings of panel members. Supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase were generated. Results: Two rounds of the Delphi process achieved stopping criteria for all statements. From an initial 60 statements, 43 were rated appropriate (median score 7 or more)and met agreement criteria (disagreement index <0.5); these were used in the clinical scoring system. The rating of clinical scenarios supported the validity of the scoring system. Although there was variability in the interpretation of changes in mast cell tryptase by the panel, we were able to include supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase. Conclusion: We used a robust consensus development process to devise a clinical scoring system for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions. This will enable objectivity and uniformity in the assessment of the sensitivity of diagnostic tests.

AB - Background: Grading schemes for severity of suspected allergic reactions have been applied to the perioperative setting, but there is no scoring system that estimates the likelihood that the reaction is an immediate hypersensitivity reaction. Such a score would be useful in evaluating current and proposed tests for the diagnosis of suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions and culprit agents. Methods: We conducted a Delphi consensus process involving a panel of 25 international multidisciplinary experts in suspected perioperative allergy. Items were ranked according to appropriateness (on a scale of 1–9)and consensus, which informed development of a clinical scoring system. The scoring system was assessed by comparing scores generated for a series of clinical scenarios against ratings of panel members. Supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase were generated. Results: Two rounds of the Delphi process achieved stopping criteria for all statements. From an initial 60 statements, 43 were rated appropriate (median score 7 or more)and met agreement criteria (disagreement index <0.5); these were used in the clinical scoring system. The rating of clinical scenarios supported the validity of the scoring system. Although there was variability in the interpretation of changes in mast cell tryptase by the panel, we were able to include supplementary scores for mast cell tryptase. Conclusion: We used a robust consensus development process to devise a clinical scoring system for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions. This will enable objectivity and uniformity in the assessment of the sensitivity of diagnostic tests.

KW - allergy

KW - anaesthesia

KW - anaphylaxis

KW - drug hypersensitivity

KW - perioperative period

KW - surgery

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85064565700&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1016/j.bja.2019.02.029

DO - 10.1016/j.bja.2019.02.029

M3 - Article

VL - 123

SP - e29-e37

JO - British Journal of Anaesthesia

JF - British Journal of Anaesthesia

SN - 0007-0912

IS - 1

ER -

Hopkins PM, Cooke PJ, Clarke RC, Guttormsen AB, Platt PR, Dewachter P et al. Consensus clinical scoring for suspected perioperative immediate hypersensitivity reactions. British Journal of Anaesthesia. 2019 Jul 1;123(1):e29-e37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bja.2019.02.029