1978Clinical & Experimental AllergyRequires access

Relationship between nasal and conjunctival tests in patients with allergic rhinitis

Carl Henrik O Malmberg, Elina Holopainen, B Stenius-Aarniala

Open publisher page 21 citations

Abstract

Simultaneous conjunctival and nasal provcation tests, a total of 174 test pairs, were carried out in fifty patients with allergic rhinitis, using serially diluted antigen solutions of birch, Timothy grass and mugwort pollen, as well as cat and dog dander. The nasal mucosa was found to be more sensitive than the conjunctival mucosa in ninety-six test pairs (55%). This differs from earlier reports. Nasal reaction only was observed in twenty-nine instances (17%). Posterior rhinomanometry was also used to evaluate test reactions, but was found to yield little additional information. In 43% of nasal provocation tests, which according to other criteria were positive, the rhinomanometric results were negative. Despite a fairly good correlation between the results obtained by nasal and conjunctival challenge, the results point to organ specificity in type I reactions. Provocation tests, if indicated in a thorough allergy evaluation, should be performed in the shock organ. The provocation methods and interpretation of reactions of this study differ from those of earlier reports. Comparison of results is difficult and standardization of methods is needed.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

Simultaneous conjunctival and nasal provcation tests, a total of 174 test pairs, were carried out in fifty patients with allergic rhinitis, using serially diluted antigen solutions of birch, Timothy grass and mugwort pollen, as well as cat and dog dander. The nasal mucosa was found to be more sensitive than the conjunctival mucosa in ninety-six test pairs (55%). This differs from earlier reports. Nasal reaction only was observed in twenty-nine instances (17%). Posterior rhinomanometry was also used to evaluate test reactions, but was found to yield little additional information. In 43% of nasal provocation tests, which according to other criteria were positive, the rhinomanometric results were negative. Despite a fairly good correlation between the results obtained by nasal and conjunctival challenge, the results point to organ specificity in type I reactions. Provocation tests, if indicated in a thorough allergy evaluation, should be performed in the shock organ. The provocation methods and interpretation of reactions of this study differ from those of earlier reports. Comparison of results is difficult and standardization of methods is needed.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 21 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

Simultaneous conjunctival and nasal provcation tests, a total of 174 test pairs, were carried out in fifty patients with allergic rhinitis, using serially diluted antigen solutions of birch, Timothy grass and mugwort pollen, as well as cat and dog dander. The nasal mucosa was found to be more sensitive than the conjunctival mucosa in ninety-six test pairs (55%). This differs from earlier reports. Nasal reaction only was observed in twenty-nine instances (17%). Posterior rhinomanometry was also used to evaluate test reactions, but was found to yield little additional information. In 43% of nasal provocation tests, which according to other criteria were positive, the rhinomanometric results were negative. Despite a fairly good correlation between the results obtained by nasal and conjunctival challenge, the results point to organ specificity in type I reactions. Provocation tests, if indicated in a thorough allergy evaluation, should be performed in the shock organ. The provocation methods and interpretation of reactions of this study differ from those of earlier reports. Comparison of results is difficult and standardization of methods is needed.

Key concepts: Rhinomanometry, Provocation test, Nasal provocation test, Medicine, Allergy, Mucous membrane of nose, Dermatology, Allergen

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Relationship between nasal and conjunctival tests in patients with allergic rhinitis — Research Paper | ScholarLens