Search

Background: Many people live with ostomies after life-saving surgery. Ostomy patients often suffer from peristomal dermatitis. Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) has been reported, mostly due to contact allergy (CA) to topical agents., Objectives: We present three patients with therapy resistant peristomal dermatitis, suggesting ACD caused by different stoma products., Methods: Patch testing was performed with baseline series, additional series, and selected allergens. They were also tested with their own ostomy products as is and separate extracts of the products. Extracts were analysed using Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry (GC-MS)., Results: In all three patients we diagnosed CA to 1,6-hexanediol diacrylate (HDDA), +++ in case (C) 1 and 3, ++ in C 2. HDDA was detected in C 2's ostomy pouch adhesive and in C 1's and 3's flange extenders used to improve the adhesion of the ostomy pouches., Conclusion: Therapy resistant peristomal dermatitis should always be suspected of ACD and patch testing, especially with the patient's own products, should be performed., (© 2024 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of face masks has increased among healthcare workers (HCWs). Questionnaire studies have shown a high frequency of self-reported facial adverse skin reactions. Case reports have been published on face mask-induced allergic contact dermatitis and urticaria., Objectives: To describe the results of the contact allergy investigations in consecutive HCWs investigated for skin reactions to face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic and the results of the chemical investigations of face masks supplied by the hospital., Methods: Participants were patch tested with baseline series and chemicals previously reported in face masks not included in the baseline series. Face mask(s) brought by the HCW were tested as is and/or in acetone extract. Chemical analyses were performed on nine different face masks for potential allergens., Results: Fifty-eight HCWs were investigated. No contact allergies were found to the face mask(s) tested. Eczema was the most common type of skin reaction, followed by an acneiform reaction. Colophonium-related substances were found in one respirator and 2,6-di-t-butyl-4-methylphenol (BHT) were found in two respirators., Conclusion: Based on this report, contact allergies to face masks is uncommon. Patch test with colophonium-related substances and BHT should be considered when investigating adverse skin reactions to face masks., (© 2023 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The two dialkylthiocarbamyl benzothiazole sulphides, dimethyl-thiocarbamylbenzothiazole sulphide (DMTBS) and diethylthio-carbamylbenzothiazole sulphide (DETBS) were shown to be good markers of both thiuram and mercaptobenzothiazole sensitivity., Objectives: To investigate if DMTBS and/or DETBS could be better markers of contact allergy to common rubber additives than the ones currently used., Methods: Sixty-eight dermatitis patients were patch tested with DMTBS and DETBS, both at 1% in petrolatum (pet). Because of late reactions in 10 patients, these were retested to DMTBS and DETBS in serial dilutions. Tetramethylthiuram monosulphide (TMTM) 1.0% pet was also tested., Results: At the initial reading Days 3 and 7, no reactions were noted to DMTBS or DETBS. At retesting, 10 of the 68 (15%) patients reacted positively to lower concentrations of DMTBS than the initial test concentration. Seven of 8 also reacted to TMTM. Three of them had positive reactions to DEBTS. All 10 patients had reactions to more diluted solutions to DMBTS than to DEBTS (p = 0.0077; Mc-Nemar test, two-sided)., Conclusions: Results speak for patch test sensitization to DMTBS with cross-reactivity to TMTM and also DEBTS. DMTBS and DEBTS could be new markers of rubber allergy but a safe test concentration must be found., (© 2023 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Carvone (l-carvone) is a mint-tasting flavour additive that most of us is exposed to and can cause allergic contact reactions., Objectives: To analyse the frequency and the relevance of positive carvone reactions in a dermatitis population., Method: A retrospective analysis of dermatitis patients consecutively tested with carvone from 2017 to 2021. Data were retrieved from the department's patch-test database., Results: Of 3554 patients tested with carvone, 28 (0.79%) had a positive reaction. Carvone-positive patients had higher mean age, were significantly more likely female (p < 0.001) and had often an intraoral/lip involvement (p < 0.001). In the carvone-positive group, 50% (n = 14) had a relevant reaction, and in 4 of 14, the relevance was first revealed after test reading. Of the carvone-positive patients, 18 of 28 did not have a coexisting allergy to a fragrance/flavour allergen and of these 44% had a relevant allergy., Conclusions: The study suggests that a significant fraction of relevant carvone contact allergies may be overlooked if the allergen is not tested. Furthermore, as the exposure is widespread, inclusion of carvone in the Swedish baseline series may be justified even if the contact allergy prevalence is below 1%., (© 2022 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Regularly updating the prevalence of fragrance contact allergy (CA) is important. Patch testing with fragrance markers in the baseline series and the ingredients of fragrance mixes (FMs) is still debated., Objectives: To update the prevalence and clinical characteristics of patients with fragrance CA. To establish the results of patch testing with individual allergens of FMs., Methods: A retrospective analysis of 3539 patients with dermatitis who were patch tested with the baseline series and FMs ingredients during 2016 to 2020 was performed., Results: The prevalence of fragrance CA was 13%. About 10% of these patients with fragrance CA would be missed if the individual ingredients were not tested. Unlike hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde, there was no decreasing trend of CA to Evernia prunastri (oakmoss) extract after the EU regulation came into force. Patients with CA from only one ingredient of the mixes or having a weak positive reaction to the ingredients were significantly missed when tested with only the fragrance markers in the baseline series., Conclusions: Patch testing with individual fragrance allergens is crucial for experts to expand knowledge in the fragrance CA field. The concentrations of the allergens in FMs may need to be adjusted to detect patients with fragrance CA, since some were significantly overlooked., (© 2022 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Contact allergy to oxidized (ox.) linalool and ox. limonene has been reported to have a high prevalence, raising the question of inclusion into the baseline series. However, several important issues should be clarified and further investigated before inclusion can be warranted., Objectives: To report the trends of ox. terpenes allergy in patients with dermatitis, features of the patch test reactions, and clinical characteristics of the patients., Methods: A retrospective analysis of 5773 patients was performed. All patients were patch tested with baseline series, individual ingredients of fragrance mix I and II, ox. linalool, and ox. limonene from 2013 to 2020., Results: The prevalence rates of contact allergy to ox. linalool and ox. limonene were 7.0% and 5.1%, respectively. Significantly increasing trends of contact allergy were observed. More than 95% of contact allergy cases were identified on Day 3/4. Patients with contact allergy to ox. linalool and ox. limonene were significantly younger than those with contact allergy to other fragrances and were predominantly female. Strong reactions were associated with older age and multiple fragrance allergies., Conclusions: Contact allergy to ox. linalool and ox. limonene is becoming increasingly important, and findings show intriguing features. More studies concerning the clinical relevance before recommending these substances for screening are required., (© 2021 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Polyaminopropyl biguanide (INCI name) and polyhexamethylene biguanide (PHMB) are polymeric biguanides. PHMB is a broad-spectrum antimicrobial substance used as a preservative in many products. Due to our limited knowledge on PHMB contact allergy frequency and the fact that cases of allergic contact dermatitis to PHMB might be missed, we have included PHMB as a screening allergen since 2016., Objective: To report the prevalence of positive patch test reactions to PHMB as a screening allergen in patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis., Methods: A retrospective analysis of 1760 patch tested patients from July 2016 to December 2018 was performed. Polyaminopropyl biguanide 2.0% aqua was included in the extended Malmö baseline series during the study period., Results: Of all patients, 1204 (68.4%) were female. Positive patch test reactions were reported in 19 patients (1.1%). The most common sites of lesions were face, head, and neck (52.6%). There was a significant correlation between concomitant reactions to PHMB and other cosmetic-related allergens., Conclusion: The prevalence of positive reactions to PHMB was higher than that previously reported. Patch testing with PHMB should be performed in patients with dermatitis who have lesions on the face, head, and neck., (© 2020 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The textile dye mix (TDM) 6.6% pet. contains Disperse Blue (DB) 35, Disperse Yellow 3, Disperse Orange (DO) 1 and 3, Disperse Red 1 and 17, and DB 106 and 124. The most frequent allergen in TDM-positive patients is DO 3. Around 85% of p-phenylenediamine (PPD)-allergic dermatitis patients have shown positive patch test reactions to DO 3. There has been a discussion to exclude DO 3 from TDM 6.6% because of frequent, strong reactions to TDM 6.6% and PPD., Objectives: To study if DO 3 can be omitted from a TDM., Methods: Patch tests were performed on 2250 dermatitis patients with TDM 6.6%, TDM 5.6% pet., TDM 7.0% pet., and PPD 1.0% pet.; 122 patients were also patch tested with DO 3 1.0% pet., Results: Among the 2250 patients patch tested, contact allergy prevalence to TDM 6.6% was 2.4%, to TDM 5.6% 1.8%, and to TDM 7.0% 2.0%. Of the 54 TDM 6.6%-positive patients, 55.6% reacted to PPD; as much as 42.2% of PPD-allergic women and 50% of PPD-allergic men reacted to TDM 6.6%. Of the 17 DO 3-positive patients, 94.1% showed a positive reaction to PPD., Conclusion: Results indicate that DO 3 can probably be omitted from TDM, but patch testing with TDM 6.6%, TDM 7.0%, DO 3 1.0%, and PPD 1.0% simultaneously is needed to finally decide whether it is possible or not., (© 2020 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Dermatitis caused by occupational contact allergy to rubber additives such as diphenylguanidine (DPG) in medical gloves is a hazard for healthcare workers. Both the duration of exposure to medical gloves and the number of gloves used per day vary. The use of alcoholic skin disinfectants before glove donning is mandatory., Objectives: To assess whether skin exposure to the rubber accelerator DPG released from glove material is influenced by alcoholic hand disinfectants, time, and pH., Methods: With the use of ethanol washes, the amount of DPG left on the hands after wearing of gloves for 60 minutes was measured, and comparisons between hands exposed and not exposed to alcoholic disinfectant before glove donning were made. With the use of artificial sweat buffered at pH 4, 5, and 6, DPG release from the insides of gloves at different times was measured., Results: The use of alcoholic disinfectant prior to polyisoprene glove donning increased the amount of DPG recovered from the hands. Of the DPG released from polyisoprene gloves into artificial sweat, almost 84% was released within 10 minutes. pH did not influence the rate of release., Conclusions: The use of alcoholic disinfectant increased skin exposure to the rubber accelerator DPG. Even a short duration of use of gloves results in substantial exposure to DPG., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) has recently been identified as one sensitizer in the FreeStyle Libre glucose sensor. Analyses with gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) have indicated the presence of N,N-dimethylacrylamide (DMAA) in the sensor., Material and Methods: Seven patients were referred for patch testing after developing skin reactions when using FreeStyle Libre. All patients were patch tested with IBOA and DMAA. Two patients were tested with adhesive patches that had been removed from the sensors "as is," and two patients were tested with acetone extracts of materials from the sensor. The extracts were analysed with GC-MS., Results: Six patients reacted to both IBOA and DMAA, and one patient reacted only to DMAA. Positive reactions were also observed in both patients tested with the adhesive patch "as is". One patient reacted to both an extract of the adhesive patch and an extract of the sensor itself. When analysed with GC-MS, IBOA was found in both extracts and DMAA was found in the extract of the sensor., Conclusion: Both IBOA and DMAA may be present in adhesives used in medical devices such as glucose sensors or insulin pumps, and should be patch tested when suspected contact allergic reactions to these products are investigated., (© 2019 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Hand eczema (HE) in healthcare workers (HCWs) is common. Besides wet work, healthcare work also implies exposure to contact allergens., Objectives: To assess HE and contact allergy related to occupational exposures in HCWs., Methods: In a cross-sectional study, 311 HCWs with HE within the preceding 12 months and a control group of 114 HCWs without HE were investigated with the baseline series and a special patch test series based on substances found in the gloves, soaps, alcoholic hand disinfectants and hand creams provided at the hospitals., Results: Contact allergy to rubber additives was significantly more common in HCWs with HE (6%) than in HCWs without HE (1%, P = .02). The corresponding percentages for fragrances were 11% and 3%, respectively (P = .004). Occupational HE was found in 193 of 311 (62%) HCWs. Of these, 22 of 193 (11%) had occupational allergic contact dermatitis, including 17 with glove-related rubber contact allergy. Contact allergy to diphenylguanidine was as common as contact allergy to thiurams. Occupational contact allergy to rubber additives was significantly associated with sick-leave related to HE., Conclusion: Contact allergy to rubber additives in medical gloves is the most common cause of occupational allergic contact dermatitis in HCWs. Aimed patch testing with relevant rubber additives is mandatory when HE in HCWs is investigated., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Solvent Orange (SO) 60 is a perinone-type dye that is often used in plastic materials such as spectacle frames and has been shown to cause contact allergy. The first case of SO 60 allergic contact dermatitis caused by spectacle frames was reported in 1999, and the second in 2011. We have recently seen 10 patients, of whom 6 developed dermatitis in the retroauricular/temporal area after wearing plastic spectacles., Objectives: To report the cause of the dermatitis in the 10 patients and to describe our first case with occupational SO 60 contact allergy., Methods: In this retrospective study, patch test results of 10 patients, tested with the Swedish baseline series and our specific spectacle and/or plastic series, including SO 60 1.0% pet., in 2011-2017 were analysed., Results: Ten patients, 2 males and 8 females, aged 43 to 71 years, reacted positively to SO 60 1.0% pet., namely, 4 pensioners, 2 nurses, 1 office worker, 1 teacher, 1 shop assistant, and 1 unemployed person. Four of the patients had an atopic history. Patch test reactions varied from + to +++; some had spread >20 cm outside the test area in terms of erythematous, infiltrated skin with papules. Retesting of patient no. 1 with serial dilutions of SO 60 in acetone showed positive reactions down to 1 ppm. Three patients reacted to the extracts of their earpieces. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry was used to confirm the presence of SO 60 in 2 earpieces., Conclusions: SO 60 should be included in any spectacle patch test series that may be used. If there is a strong suspicion of contact allergy to SO 60 before patch testing, lowering the test concentration from 1.0% to 0.01% should be considered., (© 2018 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Glucose sensors, such as FreeStyle® Libre, are innovative medical devices developed for diabetes patients as a replacement for classic glucose meters, ensuring continuous glucose monitoring without the disadvantage of regular skin finger pricks., Objectives: To report several cases of allergic contact dermatitis caused by FreeStyle® Libre, and to report on isobornyl acrylate as a culprit allergen., Patients and Methods: Fifteen patients presented with allergic contact dermatitis caused by FreeStyle® Libre. All but 1 were patch tested with a baseline series, and with pieces and/or ultrasonic bath extracts of (the adhesive part of) the glucose sensor. Isobornyl acrylate was patch tested, in various concentrations and vehicles, in 13 patients. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) of the sensors was performed., Results: All patients reacted to the adhesive part of the sensor, and 12 patients were shown to be sensitized to isobornyl acrylate. Simultaneous reactions to other allergens were rarely observed. GC-MS showed the presence of isobornyl acrylate in the sensors., Conclusions: Cases of allergic contact dermatitis caused by FreeStyle® Libre are increasingly being observed, and isobornyl acrylate is a relevant culprit allergen. Cross-reactivity to other acrylates was infrequently observed, but other, hitherto unidentified, contact allergens may still be present in the device., (© 2017 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: An increased frequency of occupational contact hand dermatitis among surgical operating theatre personnel has been noticed., Objectives: To evaluate patients with occupational contact dermatitis caused by their rubber gloves, and to describe a method for analysing the content of the allergens in the gloves., Materials and Methods: Patch tests were performed with the baseline series, a rubber chemical series, and the patients' own gloves. A method for analysing 1,3-diphenylguanidine (DPG) and cetylpyridinium chloride in the gloves was developed., Results: Contact allergy to thiuram mix was found in 8 of 16 patients, whereas 12 of 16 patients reacted to DPG. In 7 of 8 patients, contact allergy to cetylpyridinium chloride was found. In the patients' gloves, cetylpyridinium chloride and DPG were detected at higher concentrations on the inside of the gloves than on the outside. Most patients had worked for decades in their present occupations, but their hand dermatitis had only been present for months., Conclusion: Contact allergy to DPG in gloves has been disputed, but, in this study, we were able to confirm the presence of DPG and cetylpyridinium chloride in the causative gloves by using a modified method for the analysis. The presence of these chemicals in gloves caused an increase in occupational contact dermatitis in surgical operating theatre personnel., (© 2012 John Wiley & Sons A/S.)

From August 1999 to April 2001, there was an outbreak of severe eczema at a factory manufacturing medical equipment. A glue, mainly based on the isocyanate dicyclohexylmethane-4,4'-diisocyanate (DMDI), was suspected as being the cause of the problem. 16 workers with recent episodes of eczema were patch tested with a standard series, an isocyanate series and work material. The latter consisted of, among other things, the glue, DMDI, and an amine, dicyclohexylmethane-4,4'-diamine (DMDA), which is formed when DMDI reacts with water. 13 patients reacted to DMDI, 9 to 1,6-hexamethylenediisocyanate (HDI) and 4 to isophoronediisocyanate (IPDI), all of which are aliphatic isocyanates. None reacted to the aromatic isocyanates, diphenylmethane-4,4'-diisocyanate (MDI) or toluenediisocyanate (TDI). One explanation for this pattern could be that aromatic diisocyanates are more reactive than the aliphatic ones and that, therefore, they are inactivated before penetrating the skin. 5 patients reacted to DMDA and 5 to 4,4'-diaminodiphenylmethane (MDA). Concurrent reactions to DMDA and or MDA with DMDI could be due to cross-reactivity. The positive reactions to MDA could also be a marker of MDI exposure. Yet another patient, investigated in 1997 with suspected work-related contact dermatitis from the glue, is described. She, however, showed no positive reactions to any isocyanates.