Treatments of cold urticaria: A systematic review

Background Several treatment options for cold urticaria (ColdU) have been studied and reported, but systematic reviews and meta-analyses are limited. Objectives We sought to meta-analyze and review the efficacy and safety of ColdU treatments. Methods We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. Suitable reports were identified by searching PubMed, Scopus, and Web of Science. Our systematic review included 16 studies, 9 of which met the eligibility criteria for the meta-analysis. We analyzed the effects of treatments on critical temperature thresholds (CTTs) and critical stimulation time thresholds (CSTTs), as well as on rates of complete response and adverse events. Results Our pooled meta-analyses showed that nonsedating second-generation H1-antihistamines (nsAHs) are effective in the treatment of ColdU and that updosing of nsAHs significantly reduced CTTs relative to their own standard doses and placebos. In 4 studies involving CSTTs, updosing of nsAHs also resulted in significantly better CSTTs than their own standard doses or placebos. Omalizumab resulted in a marked reduction of CTTs in H1-antihistamine–resistant patients. Of 118 adverse events in 8 studies, standard-dose nsAHs, updosed nsAHs, and omalizumab produced lower numbers of adverse events than first-generation antihistamines. Conclusions Our study showed that greater dosages of nsAHs were more effective than standard dosages in controlling ColdU symptoms. Increasing the dosages was not significantly associated with higher adverse event rates. Omalizumab at 150 and 300 mg every 4 weeks was shown to be effective for patients with ColdU refractory to antihistamines.