DOI: 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2009.02178.x
Position paper
T. Zuberbier
Charit Universittsmedizin Berlin
Allergie-Centrum-Charit
Charitplatz 1
D-10117 Berlin
Germany
Accepted for publication 3 July 2009
Zuberbier et al.
however, is the same for all types of urticaria: to achieve
complete symptom relief. The management of urticaria is
best subdivided into two basic lines of approach both of
which should be considered in each patient: rst, the
identication and elimination of the underlying cause(s)
and/or eliciting trigger(s), and, second, treatment aimed
at providing symptom relief.
Treating the cause is the most desirable option, but it
is, unfortunately, not applicable in the majority of
patients, especially in cases of inducible urticarias which
are mainly idiopathic. Second best is avoidance of the
eliciting trigger or stimulus, which can be instituted for
the rare patients with IgE-mediated urticaria and partly,
for those patients with physical urticaria. In the latter
group, the impact of physical stimuli can be diminished
and symptoms ameliorated by appropriate measures (e.g.,
cushioning in pressure urticaria). In spontaneous acute
and chronic urticaria, treatment of associated infectious
and/or inammatory processes, including Helicobacter
pylori-associated gastritis, parasitic diseases, or food and
drug intolerance may be helpful in selected cases. In
addition, it must be noted that some factors, e.g.,
analgesic drugs, can elicit new wheal formation as well
as augment preexisting urticaria. Chronic urticaria is also
recognized as stress vulnerable disease in which
psychological stress can trigger or increase itching. It is
suggested that eective management process could take
into account, at least in some of the patients, psychological factors (24). In all cases symptomatic relief should
be oered while searching for causes.
Symptomatic treatment is currently the most frequently
used form of management. It aims ameliorating or
suppressing symptoms by inhibiting the release and/or
the eect of mast cell mediators and possibly other
inammatory mediators.
The treatment options available have been evaluated in
this guideline according to the following methods.
together with the study type, decided the Level of Evidence (1++
to 1), 2++ to 2), 3, 4) that led to the Grade of Recommendation
(AD). However, the SIGN methodology does not assign a quality
or level of evidence for the body of evidence and it is intended only
for assessment of individual studies that are identied during the
search process. However, in order to express the condence in the
totality of evidence an approach to assessing a body of evidence for
a given questions is required. For the current guideline we used a
pragmatic Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) approach transforming the already existing evaluations of the literature according to the SIGN
criteria for individual studies from the previous guideline and
adding newly published studies (Table 1). We based our ratings on
the levels of evidence we obtained using the SIGN methodology
from the previous guidelines without re-examining the assessments.
The key principle of the GRADE approach is to provide transparency and clear and explicit criteria for assessing the quality of
evidence and grading the strength of recommendations (711).
While recommendations in guidelines, in particular those developed
Table 1. Evidence of identified literature sources
The level of evidence provided by the study is derived from the code allocated for
the methodological quality and the type of study, according to the Methodology
Checklist 2: Randomized Controlled Trials of the Scottish Intercollegiate
Guidelines Network (SIGN).
1++
1+
1)
2++
2+
2)
3
4
Methods
As members of the panel, the authors had prepared their suggestions regarding management of urticaria before the meeting. The
draft of the guideline took into account all available evidence in the
literature (including Medline and Embase searches and hand searches of abstracts at international allergy congresses in 20042008)
and was based on the existing consensus reports of the rst and
second symposia in 2000 and 2004 (5, 6). These suggestions were
then discussed in detail among the panel members and with the
participants of the meeting, to achieve a consensus using a simple
voting system where appropriate. The participation of more than
200 specialists in urticaria from 33 countries ensured that this
consensus included European and global regional dierences in
viewpoint and provided a basis for improved comparison of future
studies in the eld of urticaria.
In the previous consensus document, studies were evaluated using
the Methodology Checklist 2 for Randomized Controlled Trials
(RCTs) of the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN)
resulting in the following 3-level code: ++, +, ). This code,
1428
2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
Strength of recommendation
Recommendations are classied as strong or weak recommendations, as recommended in the GRADE methodology. Strong recommendations can be interpreted as:
Most individuals should receive the intervention
Most well informed individuals would want the recommended
course of action and only a small proportion would not
Could be used for policy making or as or quality indicator.
1429
Zuberbier et al.
Weak recommendations can be interpreted as:
The majority of well informed individuals would want the suggested course of action, but an appreciable proportion would not
Widely varying values and preferences
Policy making or quality indicator development will require
extensive debates and involvement of many stakeholders.
Management of urticaria
Identification and elimination of the underlying cause and/or trigger
With the use of this therapeutic approach, an exact
diagnosis is a basic prerequisite, see the sister guideline on
the denition, classication, and diagnosis of urticaria (1),
which is just like this guideline based on the previously
published consensus (18).
If remission, following elimination of the suspected
agent occurs, only recurrence of symptoms in a doubleblind provocation test will provide denitive proof of its
causative nature since spontaneous remission of urticaria
might also occur incidentally in parallel with, but not
because of, the elimination of a suspected cause or trigger.
Identifying the cause of urticaria is not, however, easily
possible in most cases, e.g. infections may be a cause,
aggravating factor or unassociated bystander.
Drugs. When such agents are suspected in the course of
diagnosis, they should be omitted entirely or substituted
by another class of agents if indispensable. Drugs causing
nonallergic hypersensitivity reactions (the prototypes
being nonsteroidal anti-inammatory drugs and angiotensin converting enzyme-inhibitors-inhibitors) cannot
only elicit, but can also aggravate preexisting chronic
spontaneous urticaria (19), so that elimination will only
improve symptoms.
Physical stimuli. Avoidance of physical stimuli for the
treatment of physical urticaria is desirable, but not always
simple. Detailed information about the physical properties of the respective stimulus should make the patient
suciently knowledgeable to recognize and control
exposure in normal daily life. Thus, it is important in
delayed pressure urticaria and in symptomatic dermographism/urticaria factitia to point out that pressure is
dened as force per area and that simple devices, such as
broadening of the handle of heavy bags for pressure
urticaria or reducing friction in case of symptomatic
dermographism/urticaria factitia, may already be helpful
in the prevention of symptoms. Similar considerations
hold for cold urticaria where the impact of the chill factor
in cold winds needs to be remembered. For solar urticaria,
the exact identication of the range of eliciting wave
2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
Zuberbier et al.
Table 3. Treatments in urticaria
Patient
population
Intervention
a. Acute
spontaneous
urticaria
ns sg H1-AH: l
b. Chronic
spontaneous
urticaria
ns sg H1-AH
- Increase dosage
if necessary
up to four-fold
Strength
of
recommen
dation
Quality
for use of
of
evidenceb intervention
Low
High
Low
Strong
Strong
Weak
Reference
(48, 71)
(76112)
(111, 112)
(47, 113)
Low
High
Monotherapy
Tricyclic antidepressants (doxepin)
Ketotifen
Hydroxychloroquine
Dapsone
Sulfasalazine
Methotrexate
Corticosteroids
Other treatment options
Combination therapy
ns sg H1-AH and stanazolol
ns sg H1-AH and zafirlukast
ns sg H1-AH and
Mycophenolate mofetil
ns sg H1-AH and narrowband UV-B
ns sg H1-AH and omalizumab
Monotherapy
Oxatomide
Nifedipine
Warfarin
Interferon
Plasmapheresis
Immunoglobulins
Autologs whole blood Injection
(ASST positive only)
c. Physical
urticaria
Avoidance of stimuli
High
Strong
Symptomatic
ns sg H1-AH:
Low
Weak
dermographism/
Urticaria factitia
Delayed pressure ns sg H1-AH: Cetirizine Low
All weak
urticaria
Very low
High dose ns H1-AH
Very low
1432
Quality
of
evidenceb
Strength
of
recommendation
for use of
intervention
Weak
Very low
Very low
Reference
(72)
(48)
(7375)
All weak
Very low
(115118)
Low
Low
Very
Very
Very
Very
Very
(119121)
(122)
(123)
(124, 125)
(126)
(126)
(127, 128)
low
low
low
low
low
(129)
(130)
Low
Very low
(131)
(51)
(55, 59, 132134)
Very low
Very low
Very low
Very
Very
Very
Very
Very
Very
Very
(135137)
(138)
(139, 140)
(141, 142)
(26, 143)
low
low
low
low
low
low (63)
low (144, 145)
No controlled
studies but
very strong
effects in
observational
studies
(146, 147)
(40, 149)
Very low
Very low
Combination therapy
Montelukast and ns H1-AH (loratadine) Very low
All weak
(148)
(54)
All weak
(150)
Monotherapy
Prednisolone 4020 mg*
Very low
(151)
Very low
(151)
Monotherapy
Topical clobetasol propionate
Sulfasalazine
Very low
Very low
(152, 153)
(154)
2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
Patient
population
Cold urticaria
Solar urticaria
d. Special types of
inducible urticaria
Cholinergic urticaria
Intervention
ns sg H1-AH
Increase dose
up to four-fold
ns H1-AH
ns H1-AH
Increase dosage
if necessary
Quality
of
evidenceb
Strength
of
recommen
dation
for use of
intervention
High
Strong
Very low
Low
Low
Weak
Weak
Reference
(113, 155159)
(113)
(165, 166)
(172)
(173)
Quality
of
evidenceb
Very low
Very low
Very low
Low
Very low
Very low
Exercise tolerance
Other treatment options
Ketotifen
Danazol
Omalizumab
Very low
Very
Very
Very
Very
Very
Strength
of
recomme
ndation
for use of
intervention
All weak
(160)
(160)
(160)
(41, 161)
(162)
(163, 164)
All weak
low
low
low
low
low
Very low
Very low
Very low
Reference
(36)
(167)
(168)
(169)
(170, 171)
(58)
All weak
(148)
(174)
(56)
The quality of evidence was translated from the SIGN method to GRADE without re-review of the individual studies. See Table 1.
*Recommendation refers to treatment of adult patients.
Zuberbier et al.
In summary, these studies suggest that the majority
patients with urticaria will prot from up-dosing with
antihistamines although further research is needed for
predicting factors in dierent subtypes of urticaria.
Type of urticaria
b. Chronic spontaneous
urticaria
c. Physical urticaria
Delayed pressure urticaria
Symptomatic
dermographism/
Urticaria factitia
Quality of
evidenceb
Intervention
H1-combination of sedating AH and H2-AH cimetidine
Sedating H1-AH and -sympathomimetic terbutaline
Leukotriene antagonist montelukast alone
Addition of montelukast to nonsedating H1-AH (desloratadine)
Leukotriene antagonist zafirlukast
Tranexamic acid
Sodium cromoglicate
Very
Very
Low
Low
Low
Very
Very
Colchicine
Indomethacin
Addition of H2-AH to
SedatingH1-AH or nonsedating H1-AH
Nifedipine
Strength of
recommendation
against that therapy
low
low
Reference
All strong
(116)
(117, 175)
(176)
(176)
(177)
(65)
(64)
Very low
Very low
All strong
(67)
(68)
Very low
All strong
(178, 179)
low
low
Very low
(66)
The quality of evidence was translated from the SIGN method to GRADE without re-review of the individual studies. See Table 1.
Pregnant women
The same considerations in principle apply to pregnant
and lactating women. On one hand, use of any systemic
treatment should generally be avoided in pregnant
women, especially in the rst trimester. On the other
hand, pregnant women have the right to best possible
therapy. While the safety of treatment has not been
systematically studied in pregnant women with urticaria, it
should be pointed out that the possible negative eects of
increased levels of histamine occurring in urticaria have
also not been studied in pregnancy. Regarding treatment,
no reports of birth defects in women having used second
generation antihistamines during pregnancy have been
reported up to date. However, only small sample size
studies are available for cetirizine (69) and one meta 2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
Zuberbier et al.
Conclusions
Quality of life in urticaria patients is severely aected and
management of the disease should, therefore, be prompt
and involve close cooperation between patient and
physician. The aim of treatment is to achieve the absence
of and complete protection from symptoms. Due to the
high variability of disease severity, an individual approach
is necessary for each patient. As a rst line, triggering
factors should be identied and avoided as far as possible
and any associated diseases should be treated. The following treatment options exist and are discussed in detail in the
text: second generation antihistamines (including up to
four-fold higher; corticosteroids in severely aected
patients; ciclosporin for patients refractory to other
modalities). First generation sedating antihistamines
should no longer be used as initial therapy except in those
few countries where second generation antihistamines are
not available or where their use outweigh their risks. Since
the severity of urticaria may uctuate and spontaneous
remission may occur at any time, it is also important that
the necessity for continued or alternative drug treatment is
re-evaluated every 36 months.
Acknowledgments
This guideline was generated in cooperation with the German
Urticaria Patient Project Urticaria Network e.V. (UNEV), (Panel
References
1. Zuberbier T, Asero R, Bindslev-Jensen
C, Canonica GW, Church MK,
Gimenez-Arnau AM et al. EAACI/
GA2LEN/EDF/WAO guideline:
denition, classication and diagnosis
of urticaria. Allergy 2009;64:1417
1426.
2. Brzoza Z, Kasperska-Zajac A, BaduraBrzoza K, Matysiakiewicz J, Hese RT,
Rogala B. Decline in dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate observed in chronic
urticaria is associated with psychological distress. Psychosom Med 2008;70:
723728.
3. Owoeye OA, Aina OF, Omoluabi PF,
Olumide YM. An assessment of emotional pain among subjects with
chronic dermatological problems in
Lagos, Nigeria. Int J Psychiatry Med
2007;37:129138.
4. Arck P, Paus R. From the brain-skin
connection: the neuroendocrineimmune misalliance of stress and itch.
Neuroimmunomodulation 2006;13:
347356.
1436
2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
1437
Zuberbier et al.
52. Horio T. Indications and action mechanisms of phototherapy. J Dermatol
Sci 2000;23:S17S21.
53. Hannuksela M, Kokkonen EL.
Ultraviolet light therapy in chronic
urticaria. Acta Derm Venereol
1985;65:449450.
54. Borzova E, Rutherford A,
Konstantinou GN, Leslie KS, Grattan
CE. Narrowband ultraviolet B phototherapy is benecial in antihistamineresistant symptomatic dermographism:
a pilot study. J Am Acad Dermatol
2008;59:752757.
55. Spector SL, Tan RA. Eect of omalizumab on patients with chronic
urticaria. Ann Allergy Asthma
Immunol 2007;99:190193.
56. Metz M, Bergmann P, Zuberbier T,
Maurer M. Successful treatment of
cholinergic urticaria with anti-immunoglobulin E therapy. Allergy
2008;63:247249.
57. Boyce JA. Successful treatment of coldinduced urticaria/anaphylaxis with
anti-IgE. J Allergy Clin Immunol
2006;117:14151418.
58. Guzelbey O, Ardelean E, Magerl M,
Zuberbier T, Maurer M, Metz M.
Successful treatment of solar urticaria
with anti-immunoglobulin E therapy.
Allergy 2008;63:15631565.
59. Kaplan AP, Joseph K, Maykut RJ,
Geba GP, Zeldin RK. Treatment of
chronic autoimmune urticaria with
omalizumab. J Allergy Clin Immunol
2008;122:569573.
60. Magerl M, Philipp S, Manasterski M,
Friedrich M, Maurer M. Successful
treatment of delayed pressure urticaria
with anti-TNF-alpha. J Allergy Clin
Immunol 2007;119:752754.
61. ODonnell BF, Barr RM, Black AK,
Francis DM, Kermani F, Niimi N
et al. Intravenous immunoglobulin in
autoimmune chronic urticaria. Br J
Dermatol 1998;138:101106.
62. Dawn G, Urcelay M, Ah-Weng A,
ONeill SM, Douglas WS. Eect
of high-dose intravenous immunoglobulin in delayed pressure
urticaria. Br J Dermatol 2003;149:
836840.
63. Pereira C, Tavares B, Carrapatoso I,
Loureiro G, Faria E, Machado D et al.
Low-dose intravenous gammaglobulin in the treatment of severe
autoimmune urticaria. Eur Ann
Allergy Clin Immunol 2007;39:
237242.
64. Thormann J, Laurberg G, Zachariae H.
Oral sodium cromoglycate in chronic
urticaria. Allergy 1980;35:139141.
1438
2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
1439
Zuberbier et al.
122. Kamide R, Niimura M, Ueda H,
Imamura S, Yamamoto S, Yoshida H
et al. Clinical evaluation of ketotifen for
chronic urticaria: multicenter doubleblind comparative study with clemastine. Ann Allergy 1989;62:322325.
123. Reeves GE, Boyle MJ, Boneld J,
Dobson P, Loewenthal M. Impact of
hydroxychloroquine therapy on
chronic urticaria: chronic autoimmune
urticaria study and evaluation. Intern
Med J 2004;34:182186.
124. Engin B, Ozdemir M. Prospective randomized non-blinded clinical trial on
the use of dapsone plus antihistamine
vs. antihistamine in patients with
chronic idiopathic urticaria. J Eur
Acad Dermatol Venereol 2008;22:
481486.
125. Cassano N, DArgento V, Filotico R,
Vena GA. Low-dose dapsone in
chronic idiopathic urticaria: preliminary results of an open study.
Acta Derm Venereol 2005;85:254255.
126. Kozel MM, Sabroe RA. Chronic
urticaria: aetiology, management and
current and future treatment options.
Drugs 2004;64:25152536.
127. Kaplan AP. Chronic urticaria. Possible
causes, suggested treatment alternatives. Postgrad Med 1983;74:209215.
128. Kaplan AP. Urticaria: the relationship
of duration of lesion to pathogenesis.
Allergy Proc 1990;11:1518.
129. Parsad D, Pandhi R, Juneja A. Stanozolol in chronic urticaria: a double
blind, placebo controlled trial. J Dermatol 2001;28:299302.
130. Bagenstose SE, Levin L, Bernstein JA.
The addition of zarlukast to cetirizine
improves the treatment of chronic urticaria in patients with positive autologous serum skin test results. J Allergy
Clin Immunol 2004;113:134140.
131. Shahar E, Bergman R, GuttmanYassky E, Pollack S. Treatment of
severe chronic idiopathic urticaria with
oral mycophenolate mofetil in patients
not responding to antihistamines and/
or corticosteroids. Int J Dermatol
2006;45:12241227.
132. Sands MF, Blume JW, Schwartz SA.
Successful treatment of 3 patients with
recurrent idiopathic angioedema with
omalizumab. J Allergy Clin Immunol
2007;120:979981.
133. Godse KV. Omalizumab in severe
chronic urticaria. Indian J Dermatol
Venereol Leprol 2008;74:157158.
134. Dreyfus DH. Observations on the
mechanism of omalizumab as a steroidsparing agent in autoimmune or
chronic idiopathic urticaria and
angioedema. Ann Allergy Asthma
Immunol 2008;100:624625.
1440
2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
Appendix
Physicians and specialists who contributed on diagnosis and management of urticaria in the democratic process and
discussion within the Third International Consensus Meeting on Urticaria, Urticaria 2008:
Abd El Fattah, Ahmed (Dubai)
Abdal Karim Mualem, Mohamad Gyas (Abu Dhabi)
Abdallah, Mahmoud (Egypt)
Abdollahnia, Mandana (Germany)
Aberer, Werner (Austria)
Alborova, Alena (Germany)
Al Harthy, Aseela (Dubai)
Altmayer, Anita (Hungary)
Altrichter, Sabine (Germany)
Altunay, Ilknur Kivanc (Turkey)
Ardelean, Elena Angelica (Germany)
Astner, Susanne (Germany)
Atakan, Nilgun (Turkey)
Ayala, Fabio (Italy)
Aydemir, Ertugrul (Turkey)
2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
Zuberbier et al.
Brockow, Knut (Germany)
Brzoza, Zenon (Poland)
Burbach, Guido (Germany)
Chomiciene, Anzelika (Lithuania)
Costa, Ana Celia (Portugal)
Csonka, Peter (Finland)
Danek, Krystyna (Poland)
Danilycheva, Inna (Russia)
Daschner, Alvaro George (Spain)
De la Cuadra, Jesus (Spain)
De Monchy, Jan (Netherlands)
De Pita`, Ornella (Italy)
Degenhardt-Oehlert, Dagmar (Germany)
Denes, Marta (Hungary)
Douladiris, Nikolaos (Greece)
Dronamraju Murthy, Butchi Narayana (India)
Duarte, Fatima (Portugal)
Dudeck, Anne (Germany)
Ebermann, Nora (Germany)
El Abd, Mohamad (Dubai)
Fabos, Beata (Hungary)
Ferran, Marta (Spain)
Gabr, Mousa Salama (Kuwait)
Gallo, Melitta (Hungary)
Ganjoo, Anil Kumar (India)
Gavvala, Man Mohan (India)
Gelmetti, Carlo (Italy)
Gorge, N. D. (Dubai)
Godse, Kiran Vasant (India)
Grabbe, Jurgen (Germany)
Grosber, Martine (Germany)
Gul, Ulker (Turkey)
Gupta, Rajinder Parshad (India)
Gussmann, Felix (Germany)
Guzelbey, Ozan (Germany)
Habib, Douagui (Algeria)
Hakim-Rad, Kayvan (Germany)
Halvorsen, Ragnhild (Norway)
Hamelmann, Eckard (Germany)
Hampova, Darina (Czech Republic)
Hanand, Julia (Germany)
Haraszti, Gabor (Hungary)
Harold, Smeenge (Netherlands)
Hartmann, Karin (Germany)
Hawranek, Thomas (Austria)
Heiberg, Jens (Denmark)
Heine, Guido (Germany)
Hoting, Edo (Germany)
Humlova, Zuzana (Czech Republic)
Hund, Martina (Germany)
Hyry, Heli (Finland)
Iamandescu, Ioan Bradu (Romania)
Ilter, Nilsel (Turkey)
Jaeger, Teresa (Germany)
Jaar, Huma (Bahrain)
Jakob, Thilo (Germany)
Janaki, Ramamurthy (India)
1442
2009 John Wiley & Sons A/S Allergy 2009: 64: 14271443
1443