Abstract
In view of the importance of the many problems arising in regard to the relationship between intracutaneous skin reactions and true anaphylaxis, the following laboratory “accident” would seem well worth reporting. It seems especially interesting in connection with the account of a human case of anaphylaxis following the intradermal injection of egg protein which was published by Goestenberger and Davis, and which bears out certain views concerning the relationship of bronchial musculature and anaphylaxis brought out by Wells 1 in his recent critical articles in the Physiological Reviews. The occurrence which is unique in our experience with anaphylactic guinea pigs, was as follows:
Six guinea pigs, 341, 349, 62, 568, 1122, and 1119, three males and three females ranging in weight from 235 grams to 265 grams, were treated on February 9 with intraperitoneal injections of 2 c.c. of a solution of crystallized egg albumin, representing about 6.6 per cent. dry weight. The guinea pigs were used in experiments in which parallelism between protein skin reactions in hypersensitive animals and similar skin reactions carried out in tuberculin sensitive animals, was being investigated.
On February 12, 0.1 C.C. of a 1-4 dilution of 6.6 per cent. albumin solution was injected intracutaneously into guinea pig No. 349. No reaction resulted.
On February 15, 0.1 C.C. of a 1-4 dilution of the original 6.6 per cent. egg albumin solution was injected intradermally in all the pigs with three additional controls. The reactions were watched from the time of injection for two hours, at very frequent intervals, and after that, at longer intervals. At the end of twenty hours, No. 1122 showed what was considered a moderate reaction, that is, an area of erythema, about one centimeter in diameter, slightly elevated and slightly edematous.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.