Mussel allergy

Sicherer et ah (2004) conducted a nationwide random telephone survey of the prevalence of seafood allergies in the United States and a standardized questioimaire. Responses were categorized on the basis of convincing symptoms and self-reported physician confirmation of the allergy. The survey involved 14,948 individuals with 67 reporting reactions to molluscan shellfish including scallops, clams, oysters, and mussels. The self-reported prevalence in this study population was 0.4%. 

Ranee et al. (2005) conducted a questionnaire-based survey of food allergy in 2716 school children in France. Four cases of molluscan shellfish allergy were reported to mussels, snails, and oysters among this group. Thus, the self-reported prevalence of molluscan shellfish allergy in this population of children was 0.15%. 

Only nine allergic reactions to cuttlefish have been described (Caffarelli et ah, 1996 Ebisawa et ah, 2003 Shibasaki et ah, 1989). One patient was a 10-year-old female who experienced a severe reaction to ingestion of cuttlefish that was manifested by urticaria, angioedema, asthma, abdominal pain, laryngeal edema, and hypotension (Shibasaki et ah, 1989). SPT and RAST were positive. This patient reportedly tolerated octopus, clam, oyster, abalone, mussel, and scallop but reacted to crab and shrimp. Caffarelli et ah (1996) describe a 14-year-old female who had cuttlefish-dependent, exercise-induced anaphylaxis. Ebisawa et ah (2003) reported 7 cases of allergy to cuttlefish among a series of 305 pediatric cases of food allergy but provided no specifics on the circumstances or symptoms of these patients. 

In their telephone-based survey of individuals with seafood allergies, Sicherer et al. (2004) identified 67 individuals with self-reported allergy to molluscan shellfish. The inquiries were isolated to clam, scallop, oyster, and mussel which all belong in the bivalve class. Of these 67 individuals, 34 (51%) reported reactions to only 1 species, 13 (19%) to 2 species, 5 (8%) to 3 species, and 15 (22%) to all 4 species. Obviously, the interpretation of this observation is limited because diagnostic confirmation of survey... 

---