Clinical and Molecular Allergy (Feb 2018)
Allergic sensitization to common pets (cats/dogs) according to different possible modalities of exposure: an Italian Multicenter Study
- G. Liccardi,
- L. Calzetta,
- G. Baldi,
- A. Berra,
- L. Billeri,
- M. Caminati,
- P. Capano,
- E. Carpentieri,
- A. Ciccarelli,
- M. A. Crivellaro,
- M. Cutajar,
- M. D’Amato,
- I. Folletti,
- F. Gani,
- D. Gargano,
- D. Giannattasio,
- M. Giovannini,
- C. Lombardi,
- M. Lo Schiavo,
- F. Madonna,
- M. Maniscalco,
- A. Meriggi,
- C. Micucci,
- M. Milanese,
- C. Montera,
- G. Paolocci,
- R. Parente,
- A. Pedicini,
- R. Pio,
- F. Puggioni,
- M. Russo,
- A. Salzillo,
- P. Scavalli,
- N. Scichilone,
- B. Sposato,
- A. Stanziola,
- G. Steinhilber,
- A. Vatrella,
- P. Rogliani,
- G. Passalacqua,
- On behalf of Italian Allergic Respiratory Diseases Task Force
Affiliations
- G. Liccardi
- Department of Pulmonology, Haematology and Oncology. Division of Pneumology and Allergology, High Speciality “A. Cardarelli” Hospital
- L. Calzetta
- Postgraduate School of Respiratory Medicine. Department of Experimental Medicine and Surgery, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”
- G. Baldi
- Respiratory Medicine Unit, ASL (District 66)
- A. Berra
- Respiratory Allergy Unit, G. Da Procida Hospital
- L. Billeri
- Department of Laboratory Medicine, University Hospital Padova
- M. Caminati
- Asthma Center and Allergy Unit, Verona University and General Hospital
- P. Capano
- Unit of Pulmonary Immunology and Respiratory Diseases Ospedale “Santa Maria Della Speranza”
- E. Carpentieri
- Division of Pneumology, “Santa Maria Novella” Hospital
- A. Ciccarelli
- Allergy Unit, Loreto Crispi Hospital
- M. A. Crivellaro
- Unit of Allergy and Occupational Medicine, University Hospital Padova
- M. Cutajar
- Allergy Center, Division of Internal Medicine, Ospedali Riuniti Penisola Sorrentina
- M. D’Amato
- Department of Respiratory Disease, “Federico II” University – AO “Dei Colli”
- I. Folletti
- Department of Medicine, Section of Occupational Medicine, Respiratory Diseases and Toxicology, Terni Hospital, University of Perugia
- F. Gani
- Allergy Unit, S. Luigi Gonzaga Hospital
- D. Gargano
- Allergy Unit, High Speciality “San Giuseppe Moscati” Hospital
- D. Giannattasio
- Respiratory Physiopathology and Allergy, High Speciality Center, “Mauro Scarlato” Hospital
- M. Giovannini
- Pulmonary Diseases Department, Mirandola Hospital
- C. Lombardi
- Departmental Unit of Allergy, Clinical Immunology and Respiratory Diseases, Fondazione Poliambulanza
- M. Lo Schiavo
- Allergy and Clinical Immunology, “G. Fucito” Hospital, S. Giovanni di Dio e Ruggi D’Aragona University Hospital
- F. Madonna
- Allergy Unit, ASL (Sanitary District n°12)
- M. Maniscalco
- Pulmonary Rehabilitation Unit, ICS Maugeri
- A. Meriggi
- Allergy and Immunology Unit, Fondazione “Salvatore Maugeri”, Institut of Research and Care, Scientific Institute of Pavia
- C. Micucci
- Division of Pneumology and Allergology Hospital “Carlo Urbani”
- M. Milanese
- Division of Pneumology, S. Corona Hospital
- C. Montera
- Allergy and Clinical Immunology, “G. Fucito” Hospital, S. Giovanni di Dio e Ruggi D’Aragona University Hospital
- G. Paolocci
- Department of Medicine, Section of Occupational Medicine, Respiratory Diseases and Toxicology, Terni Hospital, University of Perugia
- R. Parente
- Division of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, University of Salerno
- A. Pedicini
- Division of Internal Medicine and Allergy, Fatebenefratelli Hospital
- R. Pio
- Allergy and Clinical Immunology, “G. Fucito” Hospital, S. Giovanni di Dio e Ruggi D’Aragona University Hospital
- F. Puggioni
- Respiratory Diseases Department-IRCCS Humanitas Research and Clinical Center
- M. Russo
- Department of Pulmonology, Haematology and Oncology. Division of Pneumology and Allergology, High Speciality “A. Cardarelli” Hospital
- A. Salzillo
- Department of Pulmonology, Haematology and Oncology. Division of Pneumology and Allergology, High Speciality “A. Cardarelli” Hospital
- P. Scavalli
- Unit of Respiratory Physiopathology, Allergy and Occupational Medicine, ASL Viterbo
- N. Scichilone
- Biomedical Department of Specialistic and Internal Medicine, University of Palermo
- B. Sposato
- Pneumology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliera “Misericordia”
- A. Stanziola
- Department of Respiratory Disease, “Federico II” University – AO “Dei Colli”
- G. Steinhilber
- Division of Pneumology, Spedali Civili Brescia
- A. Vatrella
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Salerno
- P. Rogliani
- Postgraduate School of Respiratory Medicine. Department of Experimental Medicine and Surgery, University of Rome “Tor Vergata”
- G. Passalacqua
- Allergy and Respiratory Diseases, Policlinico San Martino, University of Genoa
- On behalf of Italian Allergic Respiratory Diseases Task Force
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1186/s12948-018-0081-z
- Journal volume & issue
-
Vol. 16,
no. 1
pp. 1 – 7
Abstract
Abstract Background The query “are there animals at home?” is usually administered for collecting information on anamnesis. This modality to consider exposure to pet allergens constitutes a potential bias in epidemiological studies and in clinical practice. The aim of our study was to evaluate/quantify different modalities of exposure to cat/dog in inducing allergic sensitization. Methods Thirty Italian Allergy units participated in this study. Each centre was required to collect the data of at least 20 consecutive outpatients sensitized to cat/dog allergens. A standardized form reported all demographic data and a particular attention was paid in relieving possible modalities of exposure to cat/dog. Results A total 723 patients sensitized to cat/dog were recorded, 359 (49.65%) reported direct pet contact, 213 patients (29.46%) were pet owners, and 146 subjects (20.19%) were exposed to pets in other settings. Other patients were sensitized by previous pet ownership (150–20.75%) or indirect contact (103–14.25%), in 111 subjects (15.35%) any contact was reported. Conclusions Only 213 patients (29.46%) would be classified as “exposed to animals” and 510 (70.54%) as “not exposed” according to usual query. Our classification has shown that many “not-exposed” subjects (399–55.19%) were “really exposed”. The magnitude of exposure to pet allergens at home is not related exclusively to pet ownership. These considerations should be taken into account during the planning of epidemiological studies and in clinical practice for the management of pet allergic individuals.
Keywords
