Rethinking minimally invasive techniques: what the latest allergy and immunology evidence shows

According to consensus recommendations, threshold harmonization is still an open question, as discussed in the accompanying commentary. In multidisciplinary settings, training and accreditation are decisive for reproducibility, pending validation in prospective studies. Emerging evidence indicates that patient selection criteria deserve closer scrutiny, and this trend is expected to continue. Recent studies suggest that variability between operators remains a key limitation, a finding echoed by several independent groups.

In routine practice, threshold harmonization is still an open question, which has direct implications for daily practice. In routine practice, cross-disciplinary review changes the initial assessment in a sizeable minority of cases, pending validation in prospective studies. From a workflow perspective, cost considerations continue to shape adoption in smaller units, a finding echoed by several independent groups. Across multiple cohorts, patient selection criteria deserve closer scrutiny, pending validation in prospective studies.

Contrary to earlier assumptions, patient selection criteria deserve closer scrutiny, and this trend is expected to continue. Across multiple cohorts, pre-analytical factors account for a large share of observed variance, and this trend is expected to continue. When protocols are compared, patient selection criteria deserve closer scrutiny, and this trend is expected to continue. Recent studies suggest that threshold harmonization is still an open question, although confirmatory data are still limited.