Get Permission Arora: A study of skin prick test to identify common allergens in allergic rhinitis patients in and around Saharanpur


Introduction

Allergic rhinitis being one of the commonest Allergic disorders affects 26% of the population in India.1 The prevalence of allergic rhinitis is increasing in India, possibly due to change in environment.2 More than 20% of world population suffers from IgE associated Allergic disorders such as asthma, acute urticaria and food allergies. 3 Skin prick test (SPT) is the most effective and cheapest diagnostic method to detect IgE mediated Allergic reactions. 4 Positive SPT with a history suggestive of clinical sensitivity to identifiable allergens strongly incriminates the allergen as a contributor to Allergic rhinitis.

The type of aeroallergens differ variedly depending on the geographic region and climatic conditions, and in India specially, due to its huge size and varied climatic condition. India, being a populous country with diverse food habits due to socio cultural and communal differences, also afforded us an opportunity to study the sensitivity to common food allergens in patients of our region. The present study was carried out to identify the patterns of SPT to various types of allergens for avoidance therapy and immunotherapy in patients attending an pulmonary medicine and ENT clinical in tertiary centre and hospitals in Saharanpur.

Materials and Methods

Subjects

This is a prospective observational study on 50 consecutive patients of allergic rhinitis in an pulmonary and ENT OPDs between July 2018 and June 2019.

After taking clinical history and physical examination of patients in pulmonary medicine and ENT outpatient departments, diagnosis of allergic rhinitis was made on the basis of the Allergic Rhinitis and its impact on Asthma guidelines(2016 revised).5

Inclusion criteria

Consecutive patients of allergic rhinitis attending the pulmonary medicine and ENT outdoor department, between 10 to 65 years of age group and ready to give informed consent for inclusion in the study and SPT were enrolled.

Exclusion criteria

  1. Patients with other causes of rhinitis like vasomotor or atrophic rhinitis

  2. Patients in whom skin prick test was negative were also excluded

  3. Pregnant and lactating females, patients with ischemic heart disease, patients receiving immunosuppressive medications were also excluded.

Clearance and approvals

Clearance was obtained from the institutional ethic committee. Informed consent in their vernacular language was obtained from the patients.

Skin prick test procedure

The selected patients for SPT were discontinued on medication that interfere with test results, decrease systemic allergic reactions. The allergens were obtained from Creative diagnostic Medicare Private Limited Mumbai The Allergens included 23 Pollens, 4 inscets, 3 mites, 4 types of common dusts,6 fungi and 6 animal epithelia and histamine and saline as controls. The test procedure consisted of cleaning the skin over flexor aspect of forearm and arm with isopropyl alcohol and allowing it to dry. The skin was marked with a ball point pen to identify and locate the site of each test with a difference of 2cm in between the two test sites. A single drop of each test solution was placed. SPT was performed using a sterile lancet. The lancet was placed through the drop of allergens extract at an acute angle to the skin and a shallow lift was made to elevate the small portion of epidermis without inducing bleeding. The lancet was raised for a second before skin was released. This was repeated for each drop of test solution. The lancet was carefully wiped on a dry cotton wool between the tests. Excess solution was removed by placing a tissue over the arm for a moment

The reactions were read after 15 to 20 minutes which appeared as raised wheal and erythema. Both wheal and erythema diameter were measured using a ruler supplied with the allergen kit and the results expressed in mm. Grading of skin prick test was done by comparison to a histamine positive control and a reaction of >3mm than that produced by the negative control on SPT was considered as positive reaction.

The statistical analysis was done using SPSS version 15.0 statistical Analysis Software.

Results

The age distribution of the patient ranged from 14 to 69 years. Majority of patients belonged to second and third decades without sex predilection in our study. Table 1

A total of 50 patients fulfilling the inclusion criteria were selected and subjected to SPT with 46 allergens in each patient. Thus, a total of 2300 SPTs were done and response was tabulated. Table 2

Maximum numbers of positive (2+,3+,4+) SPT was given by pollens in 40 patients (80%), followed by dust in 35 patients (70%). Mites and insects gave positive SPT in 26(52%) and 25 (50%) patients respectively, closely followed by fungi in 24 (48%) patients. Least reaction was given by epithelia in 20% of patients. Results of positive SPT with varied antigen were tabulated. Table 3, Table 4, Table 5, Table 6, Table 7 .

Table 1

Age distribution of patients

Age (Years)

No. of Patients

Percentage

0—9

0

0

10—19

8

16

20—29

14

28

30—39

11

22

40—49

10

20

50—59

05

10

60—69

02

04

Total

50

100

Table 2

Positive skin prick test response to various groups of allergens

Allergen Subgroups

No. of Patients

Percentage

Mite

26

52

Fungi

24

48

Pollens

40

80

Dust

35

70

Epithelia

10

20

Insects

25

50

Table 3

Results of positive skin tests with various pollen antigens tested

Pollens

No. of Patients

Percentage

1. Cynodon dactylon

20

40

2. Parthenium hysterophorus

35

70

3. Sorghum vulgare

0

0

4. Pennisetum typhoides

6

12

5. Amaranthus spinosus

20

40

6. Argermone mexicana

20

40

7. Xanthium strumariuni

0

0

8. Brassica nigra

15

30

9. Ageratum conyzoides

0

0

10. Cocus nucifera

0

0

11. Peltophorum pterocarpum

0

0

12. Eucalyputs spp.

17

34

13. Ricinus communis

21

42

14. Cassia siamea

0

0

15.Zea mays

0

0

16. Acacia Arabica

0

0

17. Prosopis juliflora

16

32

18. Carica papaya

0

0

19. Ipomoea sp.

0

0

20. Helianthus annus

15

30

21. Cassia occidentalis

0

0

22. Azadirachta indica

0

0

23. Mangifera Indica

0

0

Table 4

Results of positive skin tests with four dusts tested

Dust

No. of Patients

Percentage

Cotton Dust

05

10

House dust

32

64

Hay dust

20

40

Grain dust (Rice)

06

12

Table 5

Results of skin prick test with three mite allergens tested

Mite

No. of Patients

Percentage

Mite (D-Farine)

25

50

Mite (D-Pteronyssinus)

9

18

Blomia sp.

6

12

Table 6

Results of positive skin prick test with antigenic extracts of various insects tested

Insects

No. of Patients

Percentage

Ants

0

0

Cockroach

14

28

Housefly

09

18

Mosquito

04

8

Table 7

Results of positive skin prick test given by different fungal antigens tested

Fungi

No. of Patients

Percentage

Aspergillus fumigatus

0

0

Aspergillus niger

15

30

Rhizopus nigricans

4

8

Penicillium Sp.

5

10

Candida albicans

0

0

Aspergillus versicolor

4

8

Table 8

Results of positive skin prick test with different epithelial antigens tested

Epithelia

No. of Patients

Percentage

Dog epithelia

5

10

Sheep’s wool

0

0

Human dander

0

0

Buffalo dander

7

14

Cat epithelia

3

6

Chicken feather

0

0

Discussion

The definitive diagnosis of nasal allergy requires identification of allergens and establishment of causal relationship between exposure to allergens and occurrence of relevant symptoms. Identification of allergens is possible by careful history taking and diagnostic procedure such as SPT. SPT is highly sensitive, specific, simple, inexpensive and reproducible investigation for diagnosis of allergic diseases.6

The purpose of the study was to determine and characterize common allergens using SPT in patients of allergic rhinitis in a tertiary centre and hospitals of Saharanpur, India.

The most common allergens found in our study were pollen (80%), dust (70%), mite(52%), insects(50%), fungi(48%) and epithelial antigen(20%).overall, pollen of Parthenium (70%) followed by house dust(64%) were found to be the most common offending allergens.

The most common allergen in our study was pollen (80%) and most common among all pollen was pollen of Parthenium, similar to study done by Chaubal and gadve7 and it was found to be the second most common allergen after Amaranthus in Bangalore in a study conducted by Anand and Agashi.8 Next common offending pollen antigen noted was the pollen of Ricinus in 42% of the patients. This pollen was found to be the commonest offending allergen by Pherwani et al. 9

Cynodon, Amaranthus and Argemone gave positive reactions in 40% of the patients each. Prosopis juliflora gave positive reactions in 32% of the patients in the present study which is also similar to the study done by Raju et al 10 who found it is 30% and Gupta M.C. et al11 who found it is 32.46%.

Next common group of allergens after pollen antigens that gave positive reaction was dust in 70% of patients. Among the dust allergens maximum number of positive skin reaction were given by house dust in 32 patients, followed by hay dust in 20 patients, cotton and grain dust (rice) in 6 and 5 patients respectively. House dust was found to give maximum number of positive skin reactions which was similar to study done by Jha et al.12 It was found to be the second most common offending dust in a study done by Sethi S et al,13 Pherwani et al 10 and Shanker et at 14. Raju et al found grain dust as the most common offending dust, followed by cotton, hay and then house dust. This could be due to difference in climatic condition and the other environmental factors of the area where the study was conducted.

House dust mite (D.farine) gave positive reactions in 25 patients (50%) and D-Pteronyssius in 9 patients (18%) and Blomia species in 6 (12%) patients in the present study. House dust mite (D.farine) gave positive reaction in 50% of the patients while Singh and Chamyal 14 reported in 43.3%, Raju et al in 40% and Pherwani et al in 31.3% of the patients. It was commoner than the D.Pteronyssimus as also shown by Kashef S. et al. 15

Estimates suggest that insect comprise 80% of the world’s species. 16 Dissemination of insects by aircurrents is significant in accounting for seasonal flare-ups of nasobronchial allergy.17 In our study cockroach extract gave positive reaction in 28% of the patients, followed by housefly extracts in 18% of the patients and mosquito extracts in 8% of the patients. A maximum number of positive prick test response was given by Cockroach which is similar to study done by Pherwani et at and Chew FT et al.18 Raju et al, and Shanker et al 19 reported maximum number of positive skin reactions in housefly followed by mosquito and cockroach extracts.

Six fungal extracts were used as allergens among which positive reaction was given by four fungal extracts, namely Aspergillus niger in 15 patients (30%), Aspergillus versicolor and Rhizopus nigricans in four patients each and Penicillum species in five patients. Prasad et al.20 In their study by SPT in Lucknow found marked positivity to Aspegillus spp., A.tenuis, F.solani. and R. Nigricans.

Epithelial allergens as a group gave the least positive reaction in only 20% of the cases. Positive reaction was given by buffalo dander in 7 patients, dog epithelia in 5 patients and cat epithelia in 3 patients. No reaction was given by sheep wool, human dander and chicken feather extracts. Buffalo dander was the most common allergen identified which is in accordance with a study done by Gupta et al.21 is probably because most of the patients were from rural area.

The knowledge of common allergens found among study population in our region could assist medical practitioners in narrowing down the panel of allergens tested in daily practice leading to more specificity and cost effectiveness.

Conclusion

Skin prick test is an invaluable tool for diagnosis and patient management in nasobronchial allergy. Pollens were the most common allergens to which allergy was elicited in our study.

Source of Funding

No financial support was received for the work within this manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

References

1 

R Pawankar Evidence based guidelines. Allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma2001An update. Japan: ARIA, WHO Initiative

2 

A Patel S Choudhary Prevalence of allergen sensitivity in nasobronchial allergy in Gujarat, IndiaNatl J Med Res201224314

3 

R Prasad SK Verma R Dua S Kant R.A.S. Kushwaha SP Agarwal A study of skin sensitivity to various allergens by skin prick test in patients of nasobronchial allergyLung India200926370310.4103/0970-2113.53228

4 

AS Sameer IA Shera MA Siddiqi N Nayak R Rasool S Nissar Role of skin prick test in allergic disorders: A prospective study in Kashmiri population in light of reviewIndian J Dermatol 201358112710.4103/0019-5154.105276

5 

JL Brożek J Bousquet I Agache A Agarwal Allergic rhinitis and its impact on asthma guidlines- 2016 revisionJ Allergy Clinc Immunol201714049508

6 

MS Nanda R Devi Seasonal variation of allergy profile of patients visiting a tertiary care hospital in hilly areas of Himachal PradeshInt J Community Med Public Health 2018611465010.18203/2394-6040.ijcmph20185079

7 

P D Chaubal S B Gadve Study of pollen allergy in Kolhapur during monsoonIndian J Chest Dis All Sci19842613840

8 

P Anand S N Agashe Immunological approach to extra mural environmental naso-bronchial allergyIndian J Otolaryngol19843623940

9 

A V Pherwani A G Desai S Y Bhave An analysis of skin prick test reactions in asthmatic children in BombayIndian J Chest Dis All Sci19852721924

10 

BVLN Raju K Kotilingam RM Rao SG Rao SA Bharani Allergic Skin tests in extrinsic asthmatics in Visakhapatnam - A pilot studyLung India1990827983

11 

MC Gupta OP Mittal SK Katyar Pollen allergy in KanpurAspects Allergy App Immunol19841799105

12 

V K Jha M Sundaramma S K Mishra M Joshi Clinical studies with some airborne pollens and dusts as respiratory allergens around VaranasiIndian J Chest Dis All Sci19751710721

13 

S Sethi B Sarkar S R Gupta A study of intradermal allergy testing in bronchial asthmaIndian J Chest Dis All Sci198628310518

14 

RB Singh PC Chamyal Skin test and specific immunotherapy in allergic rhinitisIndian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg19943313841

15 

S Kashef M A Kashef F Eghtedari Prevalence of aeroallergens in allergic rhinitis in ShirazIranian J Allergy Asthma Immunol2003241858

16 

A Chauhan SC Verma Distribution and Diversity of Aquatic Insects in Himachal Pradesh, India: A ReviewInt J Current Microbiol Appl Sci2016592738110.20546/ijcmas.2016.509.031

17 

F Perlman Insects as inhalant allergens; consideration of aerobiology, biochemistry, preparation of material, and clinical observationsJ Allergy19582930228

18 

FT Chew SH Lim DYT Goh BW Lee Sensitization to local dust-mite fauna in SingaporeAllergy1999541111506810.1034/j.1398-9995.1999.00050.x

19 

A Shanker P C Jain V Kumar A study of identification of offending allergens in patients of bronchial asthma in Gwalior attending J.A. group of hospitalsIndian J Chest Dis All Sci19792116673

20 

BP Singh P Nath P K Mukerji Air borne fungi of Lucknow city - A study of two sitesIndian J Chest Dis Allied Sci198022199203

21 

N Gupta M Goyal R Dixit M Agrawal M Meena R Kuldeep ALLERGEN SENSITIZATION PROFILE IN PATIENTS OF NASO-BRONCHIAL ALLERGY FROM RURAL AND URBAN AREA OF RESIDENCE IN CENTRAL RAJASTHANJ Evid Based Med Health 2018575889210.18410/jebmh/2018/121



jats-html.xsl


This is an Open Access (OA) journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

  • Article highlights
  • Article tables
  • Article images

Article History

Received : 14-03-2021

Accepted : 16-03-2021


View Article

PDF File   Full Text Article


Copyright permission

Get article permission for commercial use

Downlaod

PDF File   XML File   ePub File


Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

Article DOI

https://doi.org/10.18231/j.jdpo.2021.021


Article Metrics






Article Access statistics

Viewed: 1187

PDF Downloaded: 341