Eosinophilia of nasal smear and mucosal tissue is a common and characteristic finding of nasal allergy and many have focused their interest on this eosinophil function for the clarification of the relation between the immunologic mechanism of nasal allergy and nasal eosinophilia. Since the isolation of granules from eosinophil leukocytes and the study of their enzyme content by Archer et al (1963a), much has been written about the granular enzymes in eosinophil in relation to the function of eosinophil (Enomoto et al, 1966 ; Bainton et al, 1971 ; Klebanoff et al, 1972 ; Mickenberg et al, 1972 and Bujak et al, 1974). Recently Takayama et al (1975) reported the movement of enzymes ; acid phosphatase and peroxidase acivity of eosinophil granules in nasal allergy and they observed a noticable changes in liberation of granular enzymes following a time lapse of antigenic exposure in nasal allergy. With this interesting relationship of granular enzymes of eosinophil and nasal allergy, the author has made an electron microscopic study of acid phosphatase and peroxidase activity of eosinophil in mucosal tissue of nasal allergy to clarify the relationship of the eosinophil with the hyposensitization and the clinical application of this enzyme activity test. 


Materials and Method
s

Experimental material was divided into 3 groups ; normal control, allergy and hyposensitization group. For the normal control group, 10 male and female students, 20~25 years of age were selected who had had no allergic diseases in their past history, physical examination and prick test. For the allergy group, 50 male and female patients, 7~50 years of age were selected who were diagnosed as having nasal allergy using the prick test, but had no hyposensitization treatment. For the hyposensitization group, 50 known cases of previous nasal allergy who had received SDV (specific desensitizing vaccine) treatment of Bencard Co., England were selected and this group was subdivided into A group (less than 6 weeks treatment), B group (7 to 12 weeks treatment), C group (13 to 18 weeks treatment), D group (19 to 36 weeks treatment) and E group (more than 37 weeks treatment). Procedure for electron microscopy was as follows ; Mucosal specimens of the inferior turbinate were sectioned in 0.5 mm³ size and immediately fixed in 2.5% glutaraldehyde in 0.1M cacodylate buffer (pH 7.4) for 2 hours at 4°C. Next, these fixed materials were suspended in Gomori medium for acid phosphatase observation and in an incubation medium containing 0.05% DAB, 0.01% H₂O₂ in 0.05M Tris buffer (pH 7.6) for peroxidase observation. Each suspension was done for 1 hour in a 37°C water bath. Then, the samples were postfixed in 1% osmium tetraoxide for 1 hour and dehydrated in ethanol series and propylene oxide. The processed samples were embedded in E-pon-812 and with the ultramicrotome, thin sections (600Å) were made and uranyl acetate staining was done on some and not on others. These final samples were observed with a Hitachi-model electron microscope. 


Results
and Conclusions

1. In all eosinophils of normal control, allergic and hyposensitization groups, acid phosphatase reactivity was not observed but, in neutrophils, epithelial cells, macrophages and secreting glands, strong reactivity of acid phosphatase was observed in all groups. 2. Peroxidase reactivity, phenomena of extracellular liberation of granules, destruction of cell membrane and vacuolization of eosinophils were almost negative in normal control group but these phenomena were strongest in the allergic group and decrasing tendency were noticed following the hyposensitization treatment. In summing up the above results, the fact that peroxidase reactivity decreased or absent following the hyposensitization treatment means that eosinophil participates in the hyposensitization mechanism of nasal allergy and the peroxidase reactivity test may also be used as an objective indicator for determining the status of the hyposensitization treatment.