These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Phazet skin prick tests versus conventional prick tests with allergens and histamine in children.
    Author: Roovers MH, Gerth van Wijk R, Dieges PH, van Toorenenbergen AW.
    Journal: Ann Allergy; 1990 Feb; 64(2 Pt 1):166-9. PubMed ID: 1689560.
    Abstract:
    Forty children underwent two different skin prick tests with allergen-coated Phazet needles and conventional skin prick tests using Pharmalgen extracts (100,000 BU/mL). Good correlation between both skin test methods was found with house dust mites (Rs = 0.61; P less than .001), timothy pollen (Rs = 0.77; P less than .001), and cat epithelium (Rs = 0.74, P less than .001). The correlation coefficient in the case of histamine was lower (Rs = 0.50; P less than .01) than that obtained from the allergens. Larger wheals were generated with Phazet than with conventional prick tests (median: 54.5 mm2 and 24.5 mm2, respectively; Wilcoxon signed rank test, P less than .0001). Comparison of wheal areas and specific IgE did not reveal large differences between the two skin test methods. In conclusion, Phazet, a recently introduced simple, standardized, skin prick test method can replace the conventional skin prick test for the most important allergens such as house dust mites, timothy pollen, and cat epithelium.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]