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.)

Hand eczema is a common dermatological condition that significantly impairs quality of life. The classification of hand eczema has been considered an essential step for its management. The diagnosis of hand eczema relies on the aetiological and clinical features of hand lesions, a process complicated by the heterogeneous presentations and the considerable overlap among its subtypes. However, the investigation of hand eczema biomarkers and the advent of targeted therapies have shed light on the underlying pathogenic mechanisms. This review adopts a subtype-specific approach to hand eczema, addressing clinical, pathogenic and therapeutic factors, with the aim of providing a comprehensive understanding of this heterogeneous condition from the perspective of its subtypes., (© 2025 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Despite advances made in treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD), information on its impact and interaction with atopic comorbidities, such as asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis, and ocular disease is limited. This study aims to assess the clinical-epidemiological characteristics of patients with AD - treatment response included - while taking into consideration atopic comorbidities like these., Materials and Methods: Data were analyzed from the multicenter BIOBADATOP registry (a prospective cohort of AD patients initiating systemic treatment). We conducted a descriptive analysis of the main characteristics collected in the registry in relation to atopic comorbidity., Results: We included a total of 509 patients, mostly adults (81.9%) with severe AD (73.7%). Patients with personal atopic comorbidity (64%) more frequently exhibited flexural dermatitis (89.7% vs. 81.5%), a higher mean of previous systemic treatments (1.6 vs. 1.3), and higher baseline values on the POEM scale (19.6 vs. 17.9). Patients with familial atopic comorbidity (40.7%) had a higher incidence of pediatric/adolescent patients (24.2% vs. 13.9%) and a history of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (61.1% vs. 47.1%). No differences regarding treatment response were observed at the 6- and 12-month follow-ups based on the presence or absence of atopic comorbidities., Conclusions: Results suggest that a history of atopic comorbidity is associated with an early onset and persistent course of AD. Although no differences were reported in the short-term treatment response, further follow-up is required to better understand the impact of comorbidities on AD., (Copyright © 2024 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Chronic prurigo (CP) is a condition characterised by chronic pruritus and pruriginous lesions. While frequently associated with atopic dermatitis (AD), its link with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is less understood., Objectives: To describe the clinical features, diagnostic findings, and therapeutic outcomes of CP associated with ACD., Patients/materials/methods: This case series included patients diagnosed with CP or prurigo nodularis, identified through medical records from a specialised ACD clinic. Inclusion criteria were positive patch tests identifying relevant allergens, complete medical histories, and resolution or improvement of CP lesions after allergen avoidance. Patch testing was performed using the Spanish Extended Baseline Series and additional allergen panels as needed, following International Contact Dermatitis Research Group guidelines., Results: Six patients were identified: four cases of CP associated with fragrances and two with textile dyes. All patients improved significantly with allergen avoidance; two required dupilumab. Histological findings and clinical responses suggested a Th2-driven immune response in fragrance-induced ACD and a Th2/Th17 involvement in azo dye-related cases., Conclusions: ACD caused by textile dyes and fragrances may manifest as papular dermatitis with features consistent with CP. Patch testing should be considered for idiopathic CP or cases associated with AD. Further studies are needed to clarify the immune mechanisms underlying this association., (© 2025 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Introduction: Patch test results may be influenced by age-related factors. However, there is still discordant evidence between age and patch test results., Objectives: We aim to evaluate the patch test results reflecting skin sensitisation, their relevance and association with clinical features by age group., Methods: Prospective multicentric study of all patients patch tested with the Spanish baseline series in participating centres. Age groups were pre-defined as children (0- to 11-years), adolescents (12- to 18-years), young adults (19- to 30-years), middle-aged adults (31- to 65-years) and older adults (≥66-years). Occurrence of sensitisation, relevance and clinical features were compared by age group. Factors associated with skin sensitisation were investigated with multivariate logistic regression., Results: A total of 13 368 patients were patch-tested. Differences in positive patch test results and relevance by age were detected with the highest proportion in middle-aged adults. Age-related trend differences were found for nickel, potassium dichromate, caines, colophony, Myroxylon pereirae resin, 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate and limonene hydroperoxide. The multivariate logistic analysis (adjusted for sex, atopic dermatitis, body location and occupational dermatitis) showed an association between the age group of 31-65 (OR: 1.41, 95% CI: 1.26-1.58) and above 66-years (OR: 1.15, 95% CI: 1.01-1.32) with a higher proportion of positive results, compared with young adults., Conclusions: Positive patch test results vary according to age, with the highest occurrence in middle-aged adults. Most haptens did not present age-related differences, reinforcing the use of baseline series regardless of age., (© 2024 The Author(s). Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Despite advances made in treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD), information on its impact and interaction with atopic comorbidities, such as asthma, rhinoconjunctivitis, and ocular disease is limited. This study aims to assess the clinical-epidemiological characteristics of patients with AD-treatment response included-while taking into consideration atopic comorbidities like these., Materials and Methods: Data were analyzed from the multicenter BIOBADATOP registry (a prospective cohort of AD patients initiating systemic treatment). We conducted a descriptive analysis of the main characteristics collected in the registry in relation to atopic comorbidity., Results: We included a total of 509 patients, mostly adults (81.9%) with severe AD (73.7%). Patients with personal atopic comorbidity (64%) more frequently exhibited flexural dermatitis (89.7% vs 81.5%), a higher mean of previous systemic treatments (1.6 vs. 1.3), and higher baseline values on the POEM scale (19.6 vs. 17.9). Patients with familial atopic comorbidity (40.7%) had a higher incidence of pediatric/adolescent patients (24.2% vs. 13.9%) and a history of allergic rhinoconjunctivitis (61.1% vs. 47.1%). No differences regarding treatment response were observed at the 6- and 12-month follow-ups based on the presence or absence of atopic comorbidities., Conclusions: Results suggest that a history of atopic comorbidity is associated with an early onset and persistent course of AD. Although no differences were reported in the short-term treatment response, further follow-up is required to better understand the impact of comorbidities on AD., Competing Interests: Conflicto de intereses M. Munera-Campos ha participado como investigadora en ensayos clínicos patrocinados por Sanofi, Abbvie, Lilly, Leo-Pharma, Pfizer, Almirall, Galderma y Novartis, y ha recibido honorarios como ponente y consultora de Sanofi, Lilly, Leo Pharma, Abbvie y Galderma. P. Chicharro ha participado en consultorías, coloquios y ensayos clínicos organizados por las siguientes compañías: Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Almirall, Sanofi Genzyme, Lilly, Abbvie, Novartis, Leo-Pharma y Pfizer-Wyeth. A. González Quesada ha participado como consultora, como ponente y ha participado en ensayos clínicos de Abbvie, Pfizer, Novartis, Sanofi, Boehringer, Bristol-Meyer, Leo-Pharma, Janssen. Á. Flórez Menéndez ha actuado como conferenciante y/o consultora y/o realizado ensayos clínicos y proyectos de investigación para Abbvie, ACELYRIN Inc, Alcedis GmbH, Almirall, Amgen, BMS, Celgene, Galderma, Incyte Corporation, Janssen-Cilag, Kyowa Kirin, Leo Pharma, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi-Aventis, Sun Pharma, Takeda y UCB Biosciences GmbH. P. de la Cueva Dobao ha actuado como asesor y/o investigador y/o ponente de: Abbvie, Almirall, BMS, Boehringer, Celgene, Janssen, LEO Pharma, MSD, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche, Sanofi y UCB. AM. Giménez Arnau es o fue recientemente ponente y/o asesora y/o ha recibido financiamiento para la investigación de Almirall, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Avene, Celldex, Escient Pharmaceutials, Genentech, GSK, Instituto Carlos III-FEDER, Leo Pharma, Menarini, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Novartis, Sanofi–Regeneron, Servier, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Uriach Pharma y Noucor. Y. Gilaberte-Calzada ha participado como asesora de Isdin y Roche Posay, Galderma, en conferencias para Almirall, Sanofi, Avene, Rilastil, Lylly, Uriage, Novartis, Cantabria Labs, y ha participado en proyectos de investigación de Almirall, Sanofi, Pfizer, AbbVie y LEO Pharma. M. Rodríguez Serna ha participado en asesorías para Sanofi, Pfizer, Leo, Novartis y Abbie. M. Elosua-González ha participado como investigadora y/o ponente para AbbVie, Lilly, Galderma, LEO Pharma, Pfizer, UCB Pharma y Sanofi Genzyme. J.F. Silvestre Salvador ha colaborado como ponente, asesor y/o investigador para: AbbVie, Almirall, Amgen, Astra Zeneca, Bristol Myers Squibb, Eli Lilly, Galderma, Incyte, Leo Pharma, Novartis, Pfizer, Regeneron y Sanofi Genzyme. M. Elosua-González ha recibido honorarios/colaboración para actividades de formación, ponencias y/o como asesora de Abbvie, Lilly, Galderma, Novartis, GSK, LEO Pharma, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre Ibérica, UCB Pharma y Sanofi Genzyme. E. del Alcázar-Viladomiu ha participado como ponente y/o investigadora principal y/o subinvestigadora en ensayos clínicos para Amgen, Almirall, Janssen, Lilly, LEO Pharma, Novartis, UCB y AbbVie. A. Batalla ha recibido honorarios/colaborado para actividades de formación, consultoría o participación en ensayos clínicos de Abbvie, Celgene, Faes pharma, Isdin, Janssen, Leopharma, Lethipharma, Lilly, Mylan, Novartis, Pfizer, Pierre Fabre y Sanofi. H. J. Suh Oh ha colaborado como ponente, asesora y/o investigadora para: Abbvie, Almirall, Amgen, Celgene, Janssen, Kyowa Kirin, Leo-Pharma, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Roche Farma, Sanofi, Sun Pharma, Takeda, UCB Pharma. C. Couselo-Rodríguez ha participado como subinvestigadora o ponente en proyectos patrocinados por: Abbvie, Sanofi, Leo-Pharma, Lilly, UCB, Novartis, Pierre Fabre y Janssen. L. Curto-Barredo ha recibido honorarios por la realización de ponencias y/o como asesora por parte de Sanofi, Abbvie, Leo Pharma, Lilly y Novartis. M. Bertolín-Colilla ha recibido honorarios por la realización de ponencias y/o como asesora por parte de Sanofi y Leo Pharma. R. Botella Estrada es o ha sido miembro del consejo asesor y/o ponente y/o participante en ensayos clínicos para Pfizer, AbbVie, Almirall, Novartis, Janssen, Leo Pharma, Lilly, Celgene, Roche, SunPharma. I. Betlloch-Mas ha participado como asesora en proyectos de Sanofi y Abbvie. G. Roustan Gullón ha recibido honorarios por la realización de ponencias y/o como asesora por parte de Sanofi, Abbvie, Leo Pharma, Lilly y Novartis. A. Rosell-Díaz ha recibido honorarios por la realización de ponencias y/o como asesora por parte de Sanofi, Abbvie, Leo Pharma. M. Loro-Pérez ha recibido honorarios/colaboración para actividades de formación, ponencias y/o como asesora de Abbvie, Johnson & Johnson, Galderma, Novartis, UCB Pharma y Sanofi Genzyme. J.M. Carrascosa ha participado como investigador principal/subinvestigador y/o recibido honorarios como ponente y/o miembro de comité de expertos o steering comitee para AbbVie, Novartis, Janssen, Lilly, Sandoz, Amgen, Almirall, BMS, Boehringer Ingelheim, Biogen, UCB. El resto de los autores declara no tener ningún conflicto de intereses., (Copyright © 2024 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Atopic dermatitis (AD) and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) are inflammatory skin conditions whose association is not clearly defined., Objectives: To identify differences in ACD profile between patients with and without AD among those referred for patch testing. Additionally, to determine the prevalence of sensitisation to standard Spanish contact allergens in both groups., Methods: We analysed two groups (AD and non-AD) within the Spanish Registry of Research in Contact Dermatitis and Cutaneous Allergy (REIDAC). Contact allergy, clinical relevance and epidemiological data were compared between them., Results: A total of 5055 patients were included. Among them, 23% (1168) had a history or final diagnosis of AD. At least one positive reaction was seen in 468 (40%) of AD patients and 1864 (48%) of non-AD patients. In both groups, the most common positive reactions were to nickel sulphate, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone and cobalt chloride. Age-adjusted OR for sensitisation to nickel sulphate was 0.72 (95% CI: 0.61-0.86), indicating a decreased likelihood of sensitisation in AD patients compared to non-AD individuals., Conclusions: We did not find an increased presence of ACD in patients with AD referred for patch testing, exhibiting similar profiles to non-AD population, except for a negative relationship between AD and sensitisation to nickel sulphate., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Reports of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to phytonadione epoxide (PE) in cosmetics suggest that PE is as powerful a sensitiser as its parent compound phytonadione., Objective: To evaluate a case series of ACD to PE in Spain., Methods: We reviewed the records of 20 patients with ACD to cosmetics containing PE diagnosed across Spain between January 2019 and June 2023., Results: All 20 patients developed patch test (PT) or repeated open application test (ROAT) reactions to cosmetics containing PE. All involved women with eyelid eczema. PT or ROAT with PE preparations were positive in 17/20 (85%). PE at 1%, 5%, 10% and 20% in pet. was patch-tested in 8/17, 14/17, 11/17 and 8/17 patients; being positive in 6/8 (75%), 13/14 (92.85%), 11/11 (100%) and 8/8 (100%), respectively., Conclusion: Regulators should, not only ban the specific dangerous cosmetic ingredients, but also consider to ban or keep under close surveillance those closely related products or derivatives that might potentially cause similar harmful effects. PTs with PE are suggested to be performed at a 5% concentration in pet. Higher concentrations (10% pet.) should be tested whenever PTs with 5% pet. PE are negative., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

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: Current frequency and features for positivity to textile dye mix (TDM) in Spain are unknown., Objectives: To study the frequency, clinical features and simultaneous positivity between TDM, para-phenylenediamine (PPD) and specific disperse dyes., Materials and Methods: We analysed all consecutive patients patch-tested with TDM from the Spanish Contact Dermatitis Registry (REIDAC), from 1 January 2019 to 31 December 2022. Within this group, we studied all selected patients patch-tested with a textile dye series., Results: Out of 6128 patients analysed, 3.3% were positive to the TDM and in 34% of them, the sensitization was considered currently relevant. TDM positivity was associated with working as a hairdresser/beautician and scalp, neck/trunk and arm/forearm dermatitis. From TDM-positive patients, 57% were positive to PPD. One hundred and sixty-four patients were patch-tested with the textile dye series. Disperse Orange 3 was the most frequent positive dye (16%). One of every six cases positive to any dye from the textile dye series would have been missed if patch-tested with the TDM alone., Conclusions: Positivity to TDM is common in Spain and often associated with PPD sensitization. TDM is a valuable marker of disperse dyes allergy that should be part of the Spanish and European standard series., (© 2024 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The past 5 years have seen a proliferation of new treatments for atopic dermatitis (AD). We analyzed recent drug survival data for cyclosporine in this setting. Because the Spanish National Healthcare system requires patients with AD to be treated with cyclosporine before they can be prescribed other systemic treatments, drug survival for cyclosporine may be shorter than in other diseases., Material and Method: Multicenter, observational, prospective cohort study using data from the Spanish Atopic Dermatitis Registry (BIOBADATOP). Data from the Spanish Registry of Systemic Treatments in Psoriasis (BIOBADADERM) were used to create a comparison cohort., Results: We analyzed data for 130 patients with AD treated with cyclosporine (median drug survival, 1 year). Median cyclosporine survival in the psoriasis comparison group (150 patients) was 0.37 years. Drug survival was significantly longer in AD than in psoriasis (P<.001)., Conclusion: Drug survival of cyclosporine in the BIOBADATOP registry is similar to that described in other series of patients with AD and longer than that observed in the BIOBADADERM psoriasis registry., (Copyright © 2023 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Atopic dermatitis is a chronic inflammatory disease that is multifactorial in nature. Allergic contact dermatitis and protein contact dermatitis are allergic conditions that may occur in the context of atopic dermatitis and be the cause of exacerbations. Although the prevalence of allergic contact dermatitis is similar in atopic patients and the general population, these 2 conditions are frequently associated because atopic inflammation disrupts the skin barrier. Skin tests are therefore recommended in atopic individuals. Dupilumab could be useful for treating allergic contact dermatitis if it is mediated by type 2 helper T cells but could exacerbate inflammation if mediated by T H 1 cells: further study is needed before conclusions can be drawn. Although the mechanism by which exposure to environmental proteins exacerbates atopic dermatitis remains under discussion, such exacerbations are routinely seen in clinical practice. Prick testing is recommended in symptomatic atopic dermatitis. When prick-test findings are positive, patients should be advised to avoid the culprit substances., (Copyright © 2022 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

Background: Current frequency and risk factors for sensitization to methylisothiazolinone (MI), methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI), benzisothiazolinone (BIT) and octylisothiazolinone (OIT) in Spain are not well known., Objectives: To study the frequency of sensitization, risk factors and simultaneous sensitization between the four isothiazolinones., Materials and Methods: We analysed all 2019-2021 consecutive patients patch-tested with MI (0.2% aq.), MCI/MI (0.02% aq.), BIT (0.1% pet.) and OIT (0.1% pet) within the Spanish Contact Dermatitis Registry (REIDAC)., Results: A total of 2511 patients were analysed. Frequencies of sensitization were: any isothiazolinone 15.7%, MI 6.8%, MCI/MI 4.8%, BIT 3.5% and OIT 0.5%. MI and MCI/MI sensitization was associated with being occupationally active, hand dermatitis, detergents and age over 40. BIT sensitization was associated with leg dermatitis and age over 40. About one in nine MI-positive patients were positive to BIT, whereas one in five BIT-positive patients were positive to MI., Conclusions: Sensitization to MI, MCI/MI and BIT is still common in Spain, while sensitization to OIT is rare. Currently, sensitization to MI and MCI/MI seems to be occupationally related. Although its origin is unknown, sensitization to BIT is more frequent in patients aged over 40 years. Simultaneous sensitization between MI and BIT is uncommon., (© 2022 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Chronic prurigo is itself a common condition, but it can also occur secondary to a large number of diseases. Management is challenging as historically chronic prurigo has been poorly defined and very few treatments are available. Clinically, it presents as excoriated, hyperkeratotic lesions. When chronic prurigo is suspected, a comprehensive differential diagnosis is essential. New diagnostic criteria have appeared in recent years and new drugs have been developed. Although no truly effective treatment is yet available, patients will benefit from a greater understanding of this condition., (Copyright © 2021 AEDV. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.)

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: Chronic Urticaria (CU) is a debilitating disease whose treatment is mainly symptomatic. UCREX study aimed to identify CU patients' profile, disease management and quality-of-life (QoL) in daily clinical practice in Spain., Methods: Observational, 12-months prospective, multicenter study, included de novo or established CU patients attending to dermatology/allergy consultations in 39 Spanish hospitals., Main Variables: Urticaria Activity Score (UAS), UAS over 7 days (UAS7). Secondary variables: CU-QoL Questionnaire (CU-Q 2 oL), EuroQol-5 dimensions (EQ-5D), Medical Outcomes Study Sleep (MOS-Sleep) scale, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS)., Results: 361 patients included. Of them, 176 (48.8%) considered for the main objective analysis. Mean age (SD) of 46.6 (14.2) years and 71.8% women. The year prior to inclusion, most patients (57.1%) were treated with non-sedating H1-antihistamines (NS-H1AH). At baseline, mean (SD) 3.6 (6.8) visits were registered to primary care. Mean (SD) UAS7 at baseline was 14.3 (11.0) and CU-Q 2 oL 24.1 (17.0) which tended to improve by 8.6 (9.7) and 13.9 (15.0), respectively, at 12-months. MOS-Sleep and EQ-5D remained steady during the study, except pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression which went from 58.7% and 49.6% to 29.6% and 26.9%, respectively. At baseline, HADS showed a mean (SD) anxiety of 8.7 (4.5) and depression 5.1 (4.4), decreasing to 7.0 (4.3) and 4.7 (4.3), respectively, at 12-months., Conclusions: Although most CU patients are treated with NS-H1AH, disease activity is still important, negatively affecting patients' QoL, work activity and healthcare resources use. An appropriate disease management could be the basis for symptoms control, QoL improvement and resources optimization., (Copyright © 2022. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U.)

Background: Methyldibromo glutaronitrile (MDBGN) was one of the most frequent and relevant allergens found in patch testing at the beginning of this century. In 2008, this preservative was banned from cosmetics in Europe and ever since the prevalence of contact allergy to MDBGN has progressively decreased. Despite that gradual decline, MDBGN is still patch-tested in most baseline series. This study assessed the frequency of MDBGN sensitization, epidemiological characteristics of allergic patients, and the relevance of positive patch tests in a nationwide Spanish registry (REIDAC)., Patients and Methods: We evaluated consecutively patch-tested patients in all participating centres. Using these data, we calculated the proportion of patients with positive patch tests to MDBGN from June 2018 to June 2020 and evaluated the relevance of the positive patch tests., Results: One hundred and fourteen out of 5072 (2.24 %) tested patients were sensitized to MDBGN. Clinical current relevance was confirmed in only one case., Conclusion: Although the frequency of contact allergy to MDBGN remains high, no clinical significance was found in most of these patients (5072 tests needed to obtain one relevant positive result). The clinical usefulness of this allergen seems weak and its continued inclusion in the European baseline series is questionable., (© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Urticaria and angioedema account for many visits to emergency departments. It is important to diagnose and treat them properly at this level of care and to suggest treatments and guidance that can make additional visits unnecessary. A panel of experts in dermatology and emergency medicine reviewed the main guidelines and publications on urticaria and angioedema. The panel then developed and reached consensus on practical approaches and tools for managing urticaria, angioedema, and anaphylaxis in the emergency department. The resulting statement is a guide to management, with algorithms for differential diagnosis and treatment and recommendations for patient referral. Implementing these guidelines, which are supported by the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (AEDV) and the Spanish Society of Emergency Medicine (SEMES) will facilitate optimal management of emergency department patients with urticaria and angioedema as well as improve interdepartmental relations.