Anaphylactic reactions can lead to life-threatening situations. Therefore, a rapid diagnosis and therapy are indicated. Various guidelines recommend immediate treatment with intramuscular adrenaline in severe anaphylaxis. Based on study data from different countries, it has been shown that therapy of anaphylaxis is often not carried out according to existing guidelines.

The aim of the study was an analysis of the emergency treatment and outcome of anaphylaxis in children and adults according to its severity. Focus was placed on the recommended first-line therapy with adrenaline in cases of severe reactions. Further demographic data, triggers, symptoms, and hospitalization rates of anaphylaxis were analyzed.

Data from Emergency Medical Services from Dresden/Germany in cases of anaphylaxis from the start of 2012 through the end of 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. The data of the air rescue were not considered. The severity of the anaphylaxis, the therapy, the further monitoring, and the outcome were analyzed.

A total of 1,131 adults and 223 children with anaphylactic reactions (Grade I-IV) were analyzed. Overall, 591 adults and 102 children showed a severe anaphylaxis. The most common trigger for severe anaphylactic reactions was food in children (61%) and medication in adults (33%). Seven percent of adults and eight percent of children with Grade II or higher anaphylactic reactions received adrenaline. There is a significant correlation between adrenaline therapy and improved condition/outcome in adults and children. Sixty-six percent of adults and 83% of children with severe anaphylaxis were hospitalized. Twenty-one percent of the adults and 13% of the children did not receive further medical observation despite a severe reaction.

The guideline-compliant first-line therapy with adrenaline was not carried out in the majority of the cases analyzed. However, the study shows that treatment with adrenaline for anaphylaxis leads to a significant improvement in the patients’ condition.

Anaphylactic reactions can lead to a life-threatening situation. In the event of anaphylaxis, rapid and targeted emergency treatment is indicated.

The study sought to determine the emergency therapy administered for anaphylaxis in children and adults. Focus was placed on therapy with adrenaline. In addition, the study aimed to investigate demographic data, triggers, and hospitalization rates of the different severities of anaphylaxis.

A retrospective analysis of anaphylactic reactions was conducted using data from prehospital emergency missions performed by the Air Rescue Dresden/Germany from 2008 through 2015 using the standardized application protocol EPRO-5.0 (MIND 3) anonymized. Data from 152 adults and 29 children were evaluated, focusing especially on the acute treatment as well as demographic information, triggers, and symptoms of anaphylactic reactions.

In total, 152 adults (73 female, 79 male) from 18 to 87 years (mean 50.5 years) and 29 children (9 female, 20 male) from 1 to 16 years (mean 7.5 years) with anaphylactic reactions were analyzed. The most common trigger for severe anaphylactic reactions (Grade II-IV; classification modified according to Ring and Messmer) was food in children (33%) and insect venom in adults (59%). The data show that 19% of adults with Grade II-IV anaphylactic reactions (classification modified according to Ring and Messmer) received adrenaline. Regarding children, the appliance of adrenaline was only administered in seven percent of the cases of Grade II-IV anaphylactic reactions. Adults with Grade II or higher anaphylactic reactions were hospitalized in 92%. Three percent refused hospitalization and five percent were not transferred to hospital. One-hundred percent of the children with Grade II-IV anaphylaxis were hospitalized.

Analysis of data from the Air Rescue Dresden/Germany shows that despite existing recommendations, only 19% of adults with severe anaphylaxis received adrenaline. Among children, only in seven percent was a treatment with adrenaline performed.

On the other hand, all patients survived the acute emergency treatment without apparent adverse outcomes. Thus, further studies are needed to determine the proper use of adrenaline in anaphylactic reactions.

Haloperidol is a high-potency first generation antipsychotic and one of the most frequently used antipsychotic medications. It is a potent central antagonist of type 2 dopamine receptors, with low alpha 1 adrenergic activity and has no antihistamine or anti-cholinergic activity. It is a widely used drug with proven efficacy. Angioedema is a very rare side effect, occurring in <1% of cases.

Case report and reflection on its etiology

A Pubmed search was performed with the MeSH terms “haloperidol” and “Anaphylactic reactions”. Relevant articles obtained from the respective bibliographic references were also consulted.

The following case describes the development of angioedema in a patient with an acute confusional syndrome on the second haloperidol IM administration for symptomatic control of agitation. Angioedema has been reported as an adverse effect of various antipsychotics such as clozapine, risperidone, ziprazidone and chlorpromazine, however, resulting from haloperidol administration is rare.

In long-term formulations sensitization testing is especially important but a single prior administration is not sufficient, a second controlled administration is essential to avoid this kind of fatal reactions.