Resensitization of β-Lactams After Negative Initial Standard Evaluation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

dc.contributor.authorSrisuwatchari W.
dc.contributor.authorKulalert P.
dc.contributor.authorKrikeerati T.
dc.contributor.authorKanchanapoomi K.
dc.contributor.authorPhinyo P.
dc.contributor.authorSompornrattanaphan M.
dc.contributor.correspondenceSrisuwatchari W.
dc.contributor.otherMahidol University
dc.date.accessioned2026-04-10T18:40:07Z
dc.date.available2026-04-10T18:40:07Z
dc.date.issued2026-01-01
dc.description.abstractBackground: β-Lactam (BL) allergy workup varies across studies because of methodological heterogeneity, which affects the estimated risk of BL resensitization after a negative allergy test. Consequently, controversy remains regarding recommendations for retesting. Objective: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to quantify the prevalence, severity, and determinants of BL resensitization to support safe and individualized retesting strategies. Methods: PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL were searched from inception to August 4, 2024, in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Eligible studies enrolled patients with documented BL allergy who achieved a negative initial standard evaluation confirming tolerance and subsequently underwent retesting. Random-effects models generated pooled prevalence with 95% confidence intervals (CIs); subgroup analyses examined retest modality, reaction chronology, geography, and age. The strength of evidence was graded with Grading of Recommended Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE). Results: Thirty-two studies comprising 5766 retests met eligibility criteria. The overall pooled resensitization rate was 3.80% (95% CI, 2.35-5.50; I<sup>2</sup> = 82.96%). Limiting to studies using the sequential or direct drug provocation test (DPT) across 3414 retesting evaluations, the resensitization rate was 2.44% (95% CI, 0.99-4.43; I<sup>2</sup> = 86.08%), equivalent to 1 case detected per 41 retests. Severe reactions during retesting with these methods occurred at a rate of 0.32% (95% CI, 0.18-0.58; I<sup>2</sup> = 0.0%). The overall strength of evidence for resensitization prevalence was graded as low. Conclusions: In DPT-based studies, the pooled resensitization risk was low (approximately 1%-4%) with substantial heterogeneity. Serious reactions during retesting were very rare. These findings do not support routine retesting after a negative evaluation, as the observed risk is in the range of de novo BL reactions in the general population.
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology in Practice (2026)
dc.identifier.doi10.1016/j.jaip.2026.02.012
dc.identifier.eissn22132201
dc.identifier.issn22132198
dc.identifier.pmid41771437
dc.identifier.scopus2-s2.0-105034304208
dc.identifier.urihttps://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/123456789/116106
dc.rights.holderSCOPUS
dc.subjectMedicine
dc.titleResensitization of β-Lactams After Negative Initial Standard Evaluation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
dc.typeArticle
mu.datasource.scopushttps://www.scopus.com/inward/record.uri?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=105034304208&origin=inward
oaire.citation.titleJournal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology in Practice
oairecerif.author.affiliationChiang Mai University
oairecerif.author.affiliationSiriraj Hospital
oairecerif.author.affiliationFaculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University
oairecerif.author.affiliationFaculty of Medicine, Thammasat University

Files

Collections