Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: https://hdl.handle.net/10495/44195
Registro completo de metadatos
Campo DC Valor Lengua/Idioma
dc.contributor.authorSánchez Caraballo, Andrés-
dc.contributor.authorRicardo Villa, Ricardo-
dc.contributor.authorMunera, Marlon Gustavo-
dc.contributor.authorCalvo Betancur, Víctor Daniel-
dc.contributor.authorTejada Giraldo, Manuela-
dc.contributor.authorSánchez Caraballo, Jorge Mario-
dc.date.accessioned2024-12-24T18:21:26Z-
dc.date.available2024-12-24T18:21:26Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.citationSánchez A, Cardona R, Munera M, Calvo V, Tejada-Giraldo M, Sánchez J. Nasal Provocation Test with Cat and Dog Extracts: Results according to Molecular Components. Pulm Med. 2020 Jan 24;2020:6365314. doi: 10.1155/2020/6365314.spa
dc.identifier.issn2090-1844-
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/10495/44195-
dc.description.abstractABSTRACT: Background: IgE sensitization (atopy) to pets is commonly evaluated using pet dander extracts. However, the diagnosis by components seems to be more adequate to evaluate the clinical relevance (allergy) of sIgE sensitization. Objective: To study the association between IgE sensitization to pet allergen components and clinical symptoms. Methodology. Dander extracts and sIgE levels to pet components (Can f 1, Can f 2, Can f 3, Can f 5, Fel d 1, Fel 2, and Fel 4) were measured in a rhinitis group (n = 101) and a control group (n = 101) and a control group (. Results: Dog (34.6% vs. 23.5%) and cat dander (26.7% vs. 8.8%, p = 0.05) IgE sensitization was frequent among rhinitis and no-rhinitis subjects, and it was similar to dog (29.7% vs. 20.5%) and cat (18.8% vs. 8.8%) components. Polysensitization for dog (3.1, 95% CI: 1.5 to 6.1, p = 0.05) IgE sensitization was frequent among rhinitis and no-rhinitis subjects, and it was similar to dog (29.7% vs. 20.5%) and cat (18.8% vs. 8.8%) components. Polysensitization for dog (3.1, 95% CI: 1.5 to 6.1, p = 0.05) IgE sensitization was frequent among rhinitis and no-rhinitis subjects, and it was similar to dog (29.7% vs. 20.5%) and cat (18.8% vs. 8.8%) components. Polysensitization for dog (3.1, 95% CI: 1.5 to 6.1. Conclusions: Sensitization to pet dander extract identifies atopic patients, but its utility to predict clinical relevance is poor. Allergenic components could help to define the clinical relevance of sensitization to furry animals and could reduce the need for provocation test.spa
dc.format.extent10 páginasspa
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfspa
dc.language.isoengspa
dc.publisherWileyspa
dc.type.hasversioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionspa
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessspa
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.5/co/*
dc.titleNasal Provocation Test with Cat and Dog Extracts: Results according to Molecular Componentsspa
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articlespa
dc.publisher.groupGrupo de Alergología Clínica y Experimental (GACE)spa
dc.identifier.doi10.1155/2020/6365314-
oaire.versionhttp://purl.org/coar/version/c_970fb48d4fbd8a85spa
dc.rights.accessrightshttp://purl.org/coar/access_right/c_abf2spa
dc.identifier.eissn2090-1836-
oaire.citationtitlePulmonary Medicinespa
oaire.citationstartpage1spa
oaire.citationendpage10spa
oaire.citationvolume2020spa
dc.rights.creativecommonshttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/spa
oaire.fundernameUniversidad de Antioquia. Vicerrectoría de investigación. Comité para el Desarrollo de la Investigación - CODIspa
oaire.fundernameIPS Universitariaspa
dc.publisher.placeEl Cairo, Egiptospa
dc.type.coarhttp://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_2df8fbb1spa
dc.type.redcolhttps://purl.org/redcol/resource_type/ARTspa
dc.type.localArtículo de investigaciónspa
dc.subject.decsHipersensibilidad-
dc.subject.decsHypersensitivity-
dc.subject.decsInmunoglobulina E-
dc.subject.decsImmunoglobulin E-
dc.subject.decsPruebas de Provocación Nasal-
dc.subject.decsNasal Provocation Tests-
dc.subject.decsRinitis-
dc.subject.decsRhinitis-
dc.subject.decsAnimales-
dc.subject.decsAnimals-
dc.subject.decsAlérgenos - efectos adversos-
dc.subject.decsAllergens - adverse effects-
dc.subject.decsAlérgenos - immunología-
dc.subject.decsAllergens - immunology-
dc.subject.decsPerros-
dc.subject.decsDogs-
dc.subject.decsGatos-
dc.subject.decsCats-
dc.subject.decsPreescolar-
dc.subject.decsChild, Preschool-
dc.description.researchgroupidCOL0059567spa
oaire.awardnumberCODI 2015-2016spa
dc.subject.meshurihttps://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/D006967-
dc.subject.meshurihttps://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/D007073-
dc.subject.meshurihttps://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/D009299-
dc.subject.meshurihttps://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/D012220-
dc.subject.meshurihttps://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/D000818-
dc.subject.meshurihttps://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/D000485-
dc.subject.meshurihttps://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/D004285-
dc.subject.meshurihttps://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/D002415-
dc.subject.meshurihttps://id.nlm.nih.gov/mesh/D002675-
dc.relation.ispartofjournalabbrevPulm. Med.spa
oaire.funderidentifier.rorRoR:03bp5hc83-
Aparece en las colecciones: Artículos de Revista en Ciencias Médicas

Ficheros en este ítem:
Fichero Descripción Tamaño Formato  
CardonaRicardo_2020_Nasal_Provocation_Test_Cat_Dog.pdfArtículo de investigación998.2 kBAdobe PDFVisualizar/Abrir


Este ítem está sujeto a una licencia Creative Commons Licencia Creative Commons Creative Commons