New insights on XXXX and treatment.

@entity1 @entity4 @entity565 @entity2144 @entity111 @entity2024
Because of widespread latex manufacturing in the last decades, exposure to latex has become ever greater, as has the incidence of @entity2144 among the general population as well as the high-risk groups. Clinical manifestations range from local reactions ( @entity4 , @entity111 , erythema, and papulae), rhino- @entity2024 , @entity565 , @entity4 , to severe systemic reactions such as anaphylactic shock (from parenteral exposure especially during medical examinations or surgical procedures). Diagnosis is formulated on the basis of the personal history and an accurate allergological evaluation. @entity1 usually have a history of food intolerance or adverse reactions during medical or surgical procedures, which are believed to be the result of anesthetics or other drugs. In vivo tests are prick and patch tests and challenge tests. Challenge tests (nasal, conjunctival, bronchial, intravaginal, sublingual, oral, and cutaneous tests) are important for confirming the diagnosis, for evaluating a @entity1 's response to the different kinds of latex exposure, and for verifying the effects of desensitizing treatments on the various organs involved in @entity2144 . The most important in vitro test is the specific anti-natural rubber latex IgE assay. The only effective resolution to the @entity2144 seems to be desensitization. The criteria of effectiveness are the capability to use latex items, to undergo medical examinations (even invasive), and to remain in an environment where latex particles can be inhaled (such as surgical departments), without symptoms. The first attempts were performed by subcutaneous administration of latex, but this protocol seems to be delicate to perform because of the side effects. Two different alternative methods (percutaneous and sublingual) were successfully performed and proved to be safer and more effective, even though further studies on a larger group of @entity1 are needed.
