Search

Background and Objectives: Hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde (HICC), or Lyral® is a fragrance marker that is part of the Fragrance Mix II (FM II) and is still patched as an independent allergen within the European and other baseline series despite the European Commission banning its use in cosmetics in 2021. We aimed to study the prevalence of sensitization to the HICC in Spain and its simultaneous positivity with the FM II to determine whether it should be part of the Spanish standard path test series., Material and Method: We analysed all consecutive patients simultaneously patch-tested with HICC and FM II from the Spanish Contact Dermatitis Registry (REIDAC) from June 1 st , 2018 through December 31 st , 2023., Results: A total of 96 (0.8%) out of 12,029 patients analyzed tested positive to HICC and 396 (3.3%) to FM II. In 53% and 64% of the patients, respectively, findings were considered currently relevant. A total of 72 out of 96 (75%) HICC positives would be detected if only FM II were patched., Conclusions: Prevalence of HICC sensitization in Spain is low and has decreased in recent years. HICC is a prohibited fragrance in cosmetics and FM II detects 3 in 4 sensitized patients. Our results suggest that HICC should remain outside the Spanish standard patch test series and support its exclusion from the European standard patch test series., (Copyright © 2025 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background and Objective: Vibratory urticaria/angioedema is confirmed by the vortex provocation test. It has been agreed to measure the perimeter of the forearm after exposure to the vortex to define a positive response to it., Material and Method: We evaluated the frequency of prior symptoms following vibratory stimuli in volunteers (using a questionnaire); the response to the vortex test in the same volunteers (increase in forearm perimeter, erythema, localized edema, heat, and pruritus); inter-rater reliability; and, the correlation between the questionnaire score and the response to the test., Results: 140 volunteers participated. 17 were excluded due to dermographism. Of 123 without dermographism, 59% responded affirmatively to ≥1 item of the questionnaire. Localized erythema, heat or localized edema were observed in 58.5%; 38.2%; and 32.5%, respectively. 73,6% presented with itch. Mean intensity of itch was 3.44 95% CI (2.94-3.94). Interrater agreement was low regarding the increase in forearm circumference at three levels (intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.477 95% CI: 0.253-0.634; 0.496 95% CI: 0.280-0.647; and 0.370 95% CI: 0.100-0.559, respectively); and, optimal regarding erythema, heat and localized edema (Kappa index: 0.868; .756; and .757, respectively). A significant correlation was identified between the questionnaire score and the altered response to the test in its different variables., Conclusions: We propose the variables: erythema; localized edema; heat; and, the intensity/speed of onset/duration of pruritus, to define a positive response to the vortex test given their ease of execution and the optimal inter-observer agreement., (Copyright © 2025. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U.)

Background and Objective: Diagnosis of vibratory urticaria/angioedema is established after performing the vortex provocation test. There is current consensus on measuring the forearm perimeter after running such test to define a positive response to it., Material and Method: We evaluated the frequency of prior symptoms following vibratory stimuli in volunteers using a questionnaire, response to the vortex provocation test in the same volunteers (increase in forearm perimeter, erythema, localized edema, heat, and pruritus), interrater reliability, and correlation between the scores obtained in the questionnaire and response to the test., Results: A total of 40 volunteers participated in this survey, 17 of whom were excluded due to dermographism. A total of 59% out of 123 without dermographism responded positively to ≥1 items of the questionnaire. Localized erythema, heat or localized edema were reported in 58.5%, 38.2%, and 32.5%, respectively. A total of 73.6% of volunteers presented with itch. The mean intensity of itch was 3.44, 95%CI: 2.94-3.94). Interrater agreement was low regarding the increase in forearm circumference at 3 levels (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.477, 95%CI: 0.253-0.634; 0.496, 95%CI: 0.280-0.647; and 0.370, 95%CI: 0.100-0.559, respectively) and optimal regarding erythema, heat and localized edema (Kappa index, 0.868; 0.756; and 0.757, respectively). A significant correlation was identified between the questionnaire score and the altered response to the test in its different variables., Conclusions: We propose the following variables: erythema; localized edema; heat; and the intensity/speed of onset/duration of pruritus to define a positive response to the vortex provocation test given their ease of execution and optimal inter-observer agreement., (Copyright © 2024. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U.)

After the meeting held by the Spanish Contact Dermatitis and Skin Allergy Research Group (GEIDAC) back in October 2021, changes were suggested to the Spanish Standard Series patch testing. Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2% pet.), textile dye mixt (6.6% pet.), linalool hydroperoxide (1% pet.), and limonene hydroperoxide (0.3% pet.) were, then, added to the series that agreed upon in 2016. Ethyldiamine and phenoxyethanol were excluded. Methyldibromoglutaronitrile, the mixture of sesquiterpene lactones, and hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene (Lyral) were also added to the extended Spanish series of 2022., (Copyright © 2024 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Psoriasis is a chronic inflammatory dermatosis whose clinical and topographic distribution requires differential diagnosis, or the possible association with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), requiring patch testing (PT) as part of the diagnostic procedure., Objectives: To describe the epidemiological, clinical, and allergic profile of patients with a primary or secondary diagnosis of psoriasis undergoing PT and compare them with patients with a diagnosis of ACD at the end of the diagnostic process., Methods: Cross-sectional study with data from REIDAC from 2018 through 2023 of selected patients with a diagnosis of psoriasis and/or ACD., Results: A total of 11 502 patients were included, 513 of whom had been diagnosed with primary or secondary psoriasis, 3640 with ACD, and 108 with both diseases. Men were more predominant in the groups of patients with psoriasis, psoriasis+ACD, and lesions were more predominantly seen in the hands with little association with atopic factors vs the ACD group. The rate of positivity in PT to the 2022 Spanish battery of allergens was lower in the group with psoriasis only in 27% of the patients. The most common allergens found in the psoriasis group were also the most common ones found in the overall ACD population., Conclusions: Overall, 36.2% of psoriatic patients tested positive in PT to the 2022 Spanish battery of allergens, which proved that this association is not uncommon. Overall, psoriatic patients had a higher mean age, were more predominantly men, and showed more hand involvement., (Copyright © 2024 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Vibratory urticaria/angioedema is an inducible type of urticaria that may be elicited by vibratory stimuli from work tool and instruments. A 39-year-old male construction worker was diagnosed with acquired vibratory angioedema associated with chronic spontaneous urticaria involving a severe work performance impairment. Response to omalizumab was immediate and complete. We evaluated the Urticarial Activity Score; the response to the vibratory angioedema provocation vortex test; and evolution of analytical parameters (e.g. high-affinity IgE receptor expression on peripheral blood basophils, C-reactive protein, D-dimer and IgE levels). Vibratory angioedema may be misdiagnosed as delayed pressure urticaria if the appropriate specific provocation tests are not performed. According to our knowledge, this is the first time a pneumatic hammer is described as a trigger; the first case responding to omalizumab; and the second published case associated with spontaneous chronic urticaria., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Background: Hand eczema is common in patients with atopic dermatitis (AD), but few studies have described the characteristics of these patients in large, representative populations from different geographic regions and occupational settings., Objective: To describe the epidemiological, clinical, and allergy profile of patients with hand eczema who underwent patch testing and compare patients with and without AD., Methods: Analysis of data from the Spanish Contact Dermatitis Registry, a multicenter registry of patients who undergo patch testing in Spain., Results: We included 1466 patients with hand eczema who were patch tested between January 2018 and June 2020. Those with AD were younger and had had symptoms for longer before testing. They were also more likely to have been exposed to occupational triggers (38% vs 53% for patients without AD). The only profession for which significant differences were found was hairdressing. The most common allergens were nickel sulfate, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, cobalt chloride, potassium dichromate, fragrance mixes I and II, and formaldehyde. The most common diagnoses were allergic contact dermatitis (24% vs 31% in patients with and without AD, P=.0224) and irritant contact dermatitis (18% and 35% respectively, P<.001)., Conclusions: AD is common in patients with predominant hand eczema who undergo patch testing. Patients with hand eczema and AD have different clinical and epidemiological characteristics to hand eczema patients in general and their final diagnosis following patch testing is also different., (Copyright © 2021 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Standard patch test series must be updated using objective data on allergen sensitization. The Spanish standard series was last updated in 2016 and the European series in 2019, and the inclusion of several emerging allergens needs to be evaluated., Material and Methods: We conducted a prospective, observational, multicenter study of consecutive patients from the registry of the Spanish Contact Dermatitis and Skin Allergy Research Group (GEIDAC) who were patch tested in 2019 and 2020 with linalool hydroperoxide, limonene hydroperoxide, 2-hydroxyethyl-methacrylate, benzisothiazolinone, octylisothiazolinone, textile dye mix (TDM), sodium metabisulfite, propolis, bronopol, Compositae mix II, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, decyl glucoside, and lauryl glucoside., Results: We analyzed data for 4654 patients tested with diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, and bronopol, and 1890 tested with the other allergens. The values for the MOAHLFA index components were 30% for male, 18% for occupational dermatitis, 15% for atopic dermatitis, 29% for hand, 6.5% for leg, 23% for face, and 68% for age > 40 years. Sensitization rates above 1% were observed for 7 allergens: linalool hydroperoxide, 2-hydroxyethyl-methacrylate, benzisothiazolinone, limonene hydroperoxide, TDM, sodium metabisulfite, and propolis. Three allergens had a current relevance rate of over 1%: linalool hydroperoxide, 2-hydroxyethyl-methacrylat, and limonene hydroperoxide. Benzisothiazolinone and TDM had a relevance rate of between 0.9% and 1%., Conclusions: Our results indicate that 7 new allergens should be considered when extending the Spanish standard patch test series. The data from our series could be helpful for guiding the next extension of the European baseline series., (Copyright © 2021 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

As the COVID-19 pandemic gradually comes under control, the members of the Spanish Contact Dermatitis and Skin Allergy Research Group (GEIDAC) have drawn up a proposed list of the requirements, limitations, and conditioning factors affecting the resumption of work in contact dermatitis units. The assumption is that the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus2 is still circulating and that occasional or seasonal outbreaks will occur. They recommend that the first step should be to assess how many patch tests each clinic can handle and review the waiting list to prioritize cases according to disease severity and urgency. Digital technologies can, where possible, be used to send and receive the documentation necessary for the patch test (information, instructions, informed consent, etc.). If the necessary infrastructure is available, patients can be offered the option of a remote initial consultation. Likewise, in selected cases, the patch test results can be read in a virtual visit using photographs taken by the patient or a video visit can be scheduled to allow the physician to evaluate the site of application remotely. These measures will reduce the number of face-to-face visits required, but will not affect the time spent on each case, which must be scheduled in the normal manner. All of these recommendations are suggestions and should be adapted to the needs and possibilities of each health centre., (Copyright © 2020. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U.)

Introduction: Preservatives are added to cosmetic, household cleaning, and other industrial products to prevent the growth of microorganisms. Unfortunately, exposure to these substances can cause sensitization., Material and Methods: Between January and June 2015, we analyzed the ingredients of 2300 products commercially available in Spain to identify the frequency of a wide variety of preservatives in different product categories. We analyzed 1093 skin care and cosmetic products sold exclusively in pharmacies (dermocosmetics), 458 household cleaning and personal hygiene and cosmetic products sold in supermarkets, 636 topical medications, and 113 cosmetic products sold in a herbal shop., Results: Phenoxyethanol, citric acid, sodium benzoate, and potassium sorbate were very common in all the cosmetic product categories. Parabens were present in 16.1% of dermocosmetic products, 14.45% of cosmetic products available in supermarkets, 0.88% of cosmetic products available in the herbal shop, 5.18% of topical medications, and in none of the cleaning products. Isothiazolinones were identified in 2.56% of dermocosmetic products, 18% of cosmetic products in supermarkets, 7.9% of cosmetic products in the herbal shop, 63.63% of household cleaners, and in none of the topical medications. Formaldehyde releasers were detected in 5.76% of dermocosmetic products, 6.42% of cosmetic products sold in supermarkets, 7.96% of cosmetic products sold in the herbal shop, 3.93% of topical medications, and 16.74% of household cleaners., Conclusions: Evaluation of the presence of preservatives in everyday products allows us to indirectly estimate exposure levels to each one. Measures restricting the use of the most problematic preservatives need to be strengthened., (Copyright © 2017 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Acrylates are molecules that are well known for their strong sensitizing properties. Historically, many beauticians and individuals using store-bought artificial nail products have developed allergic contact dermatitis from acrylates. More recently, the use of acrylic nails among flamenco guitarists to strengthen their nails has become very popular. A 40-year-old non-atopic male patient working as a flamenco guitarist developed dystrophy, onycholysis and paronychia involving the first four nails of his right hand. The lesions were confined to the fingers where acrylic materials were used in order to strengthen his nails to play the guitar. He noticed improvement whenever he stopped using these materials and intense itching and worsening when he began reusing them. Patch tests were performed and positive results obtained with 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2-HEMA), 2-hydroxyethyl acrylate (2-HEA), ethyleneglycol-dimethacrylate (EGDMA) and 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate (2-HPMA). The patient was diagnosed with occupational allergic contact dermatitis likely caused by acrylic nails. Artificial nails can contain many kinds of acrylic monomers but most cases of contact dermatitis are induced by 2-HEMA, 2-HPMA and EGDMA. This is the first reported case of occupational allergic contact dermatitis from acrylates in artificial nails in a professional flamenco guitar player. Since the practice of self-applying acrylic nail products is becoming very popular within flamenco musicians, we believe that dermatology and occupational medicine specialists should be made aware of the potentially increasing risk of sensitization from acrylates in this setting., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society of Occupational Medicine. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)