Contact Dermatitis最新文献

{"title":"JAK Inhibitors Effect on Diagnostic Patch Testing.","authors":"Lasheras-Pérez Miguel Antonio, Miquel-Miquel Javier, Fernández-Romero Cristina, Botella-Estrada Rafael, Rodríguez-Serna Mercedes","doi":"10.1111/cod.14751","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.14751","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142909321","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Fixed Drug Eruption due to Chlorpheniramine: Case Report","authors":"Vanesa García Paz, Laura Romero-Sánchez, Benigno Monteagudo-Sánchez, Mónica Castro-Murga, Pilar Iriarte-Sotés","doi":"10.1111/cod.14738","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.14738","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"92 4","pages":"316-317"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142909316","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Imprecise Coding in Allergic Contact Dermatitis: A Register-Study From Northern Finland Between Years 1999 and 2022","authors":"Jenni Kämäräinen,&nbsp;Touko Loukkola,&nbsp;Joanna Mikkola,&nbsp;Minna Sivonen,&nbsp;Jari Jokelainen,&nbsp;Eetu Kiviniemi,&nbsp;Laura Huilaja,&nbsp;Suvi-Päivikki Sinikumpu","doi":"10.1111/cod.14744","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.14744","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Registry-based data are increasingly used in dermatological research. A recent epidemiological study has shown that the use of non-specific diagnostic codes is common among dermatologists.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To study closely the use of the diagnostic codes L23.8 (‘allergic contact dermatitis [ACD] for other agents’) and L23.9 (‘ACD with unspecified cause’) by using single-centre data.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Patients/Materials/Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This retrospective study included all patients whose record contained at least one entry of either code, recorded at the Oulu University Hospital, Finland, between the Years 1999 and 2022.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The database search retrieved records of 472 patients with the L23.8 code, 264 patients with L23.9. Over the 20-year follow-up period, the use of L23.8 increased and that of L23.9 decreased. In most (85.1%) cases, the L23.8 code was used even though the more specified L23 code could have been chosen. In one-third of cases, L23.8 was used to cover ACD with multiple allergens that would otherwise be identified by their specific sub-codes. The L23.9 code was used most often prior to patch testing (69.1% cases).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study revealed several imprecisions in the use of both codes. Our study highlights the importance of correct coding in clinical practice, as it emphasises the most common pitfalls.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"92 4","pages":"273-276"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cod.14744","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142909319","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Watch Out! Potential Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Acrylates in a Smart Watch","authors":"Anna Davies,&nbsp;Natalie Stone","doi":"10.1111/cod.14749","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.14749","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"92 4","pages":"321-322"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142892510","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Results of Concurrent Patch Testing of Brazilian and Chinese Propolis.","authors":"Emma M van Oers, Norbertus A Ipenburg, Anton de Groot, Evelyn Calta, Thomas Rustemeyer","doi":"10.1111/cod.14748","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.14748","url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In Amsterdam, a steep increase in positive reactions to propolis in the European baseline series was observed from 2.8% in 2020 to 16.4% in 2023. We hypothesised that this was caused by the replacement of Chinese propolis by Brazilian propolis.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To test this hypothesis and to compare rates of positive patch tests to Brazilian propolis with those to Chinese popolis.</p><p><strong>Patients and methods: </strong>In a prospective study, 2 commercial Chinese propolis patch test samples were tested in consecutive patients in addition to Brazilian propolis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 239 patients patch tested, 57 (23.8%) had a positive reaction to Brazilian propolis, and 9 (3.8%) to Chinese propolis. Of the 57 reactions to Brazilian propolis, only 2 (3.5%) were found to be clinically relevant, versus 3/9 (33.3%) for Chinese propolis. Patients reacting to Brazilian propolis had significantly more co-reactivities to fragrance mixes 1 and 2 and to limonene hydroperoxides than propolis B-negative individuals.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The results confirm our hypothesis that the observed increase in positive patch tests to propolis between 2020 and 2023 was the result of the switch from Chinese to Brazilian propolis. The rates of reactions to both propolis samples from China were significantly lower than to Brazilian propolis.</p>","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142892491","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Contact Allergy to Methacrylate Containing Nail Products: Lack of Impact of EU Legislation. An Audit on Behalf of the European Environmental Contact Dermatitis Research Group (EECDRG)","authors":"S. Mark Wilkinson,&nbsp;Olivier Aerts,&nbsp;Tove Agner,&nbsp;Magnus Bruze,&nbsp;Richard Brans,&nbsp;Caterina Foti,&nbsp;Ana Maria Giménez-Arnau,&nbsp;Luca Stingeni,&nbsp;Cecilia Svedman","doi":"10.1111/cod.14745","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.14745","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>There is a current fashion for the use of methacrylate-containing nail cosmetics that can induce allergic contact dermatitis. European Union (EU) legislation was introduced in 2021 that had the aim of preventing its development.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To assess prevalence and exposures causing contact allergy to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) prior to and following implementation of the legislation.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A retrospective audit was conducted by 7 European centres patch testing to HEMA prior to the legislation and for 2 years afterwards.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A total of 26 297 patients were tested to HEMA in the baseline series between 2016 and 2023. The prevalence of contact allergy to HEMA from all sources amongst females was 2.82% compared to 0.34% amongst males.</p>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The prevalence of nail related contact allergy rose from 0.91% in 2016 (2 centres) to: 0.99% in 2017 (3 centres); 1.24% in 2018 (5 centres); 1.23% in 2019 (6 centres); 1.36% in 2020 (7 centres); 1.30% in 2021 (7 centres); 1.52% in 2022 (7 centres) and 1.98% in 2023 (7 centres).</p>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Contact allergy to HEMA from exposure to nail cosmetics accounted for 3.4% of all occupational skin disease.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>EU legislation appears not to have had the intended impact on controlling allergic contact dermatitis from methacrylates in nail cosmetics. There is an urgent need to revisit Scientific Committee on Consumer Safety (SCCS) opinion to reconsider exposure to methacrylates and cross-reactions between them. A strategy needs to be developed and implemented to better control the current outbreak.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"92 4","pages":"283-290"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142892467","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Old Players, New Tricks: Dicaprylyl Maleate in an Unlabeled Topical Medical Device as the Cause of Severe Allergic Contact Dermatitis in a Child","authors":"Silada Kanokrungsee,&nbsp;Ella Dendooven,&nbsp;Margo Hagendorens,&nbsp;Olivier Aerts","doi":"10.1111/cod.14742","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.14742","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"92 4","pages":"318-320"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142892473","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"“Ring Out the Old, Ring in the New…” (Tennyson)","authors":"S Mark Wilkinson,&nbsp;Jonathan ML White","doi":"10.1111/cod.14734","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.14734","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"92 1","pages":"1"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142892514","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Long-Term Observations on the European Photopatch Test Baseline Series (EPTBS) in Real Clinical Practice: 11 Years of Results in a Spanish Cohort and Suggestions for an EPTBS Update","authors":"Sofia Gómez-Martínez,&nbsp;Magí Brufau-Cochs,&nbsp;Javier de la Iglesia-Martín,&nbsp;Victoria Amat-Samaranch,&nbsp;Paula Aguilera-Peiró","doi":"10.1111/cod.14743","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.14743","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>The European Photopatch Testing Baseline Series (EPTBS) was published in 2013. However, limited data exist regarding the real-world clinical application of the EPTBS.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>This study aims to describe the photopatch test experience with the EPTBS over 11 years at a tertiary hospital in Spain.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>A retrospective chart review spanning from February 2012 to October 2023 was conducted on patients who underwent photopatch testing (PPT) with the EPTBS. Additionally, patch testing was performed on all patients according to the European recommendations.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Data from 148 patients were collected, and showed a PPT positivity rate of 7.4% (<i>n</i> = 11). Specifically, we found a photoallergic contact dermatitis (PACD) in 11/148 patients (15 positive reactions to 8 different allergens, including one patient own's product). Of them, 87% had current relevance and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS) were the main culprits of PACD (60%). Alternatively, we found a contact allergy to the EPTBS allergens in 14/148 (9.3%) patients, (21 positive reactions both in the irradiated and non-irradiated set to 17 different allergens, including many patients' products). Of them, UV solar filters represented the main cause of ACD. Regarding the patch testing results, we observed a positivity rate of 39.9% (116 positives in 59 different patients). The most frequent were methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone, fragrance mix I and II and \u0000 <i>Myroxylon pereirae</i>\u0000 resin (balsam of Peru).</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusion</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>EPTBS implementation has permitted a more accurate study of PACD. Our positivity rate for PPT is slightly lower than previous reports, however the main culprits for PACD remain to be NSAIDS. The inclusion of contact allergens applied in photoexposed areas in the EPTBS could contribute to discriminating between PACD, photoaggravated ACD and ACD.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"92 4","pages":"277-282"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/cod.14743","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142881618","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Three Cases of Allergic Contact Dermatitis to 2-(Thiocyanomethylthio)benzothiazole in Leather Items","authors":"Quentin Samaran,&nbsp;Olivier Dereure,&nbsp;Nadia Raison-Peyron","doi":"10.1111/cod.14737","DOIUrl":"10.1111/cod.14737","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Background</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>2-(Thiocyanomethylthio)benzothiazole (TCMTB) is a fungicide product widely used in the leather industry, particularly since the 1990s. However, reports of allergic contact dermatitis triggered by this chemical are scarce.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Objectives</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>To investigate three cases of dermatitis following contact with leather products, possibly related to TCMTB.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Methods</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>Three female patients, aged 33–53, were referred with suspected allergic contact dermatitis related to leather products. Two patients presented with dermatitis on the feet, while one patient had dermatitis on the back and thighs. All patients were patch-tested with the European baseline series, a shoe series, TMCTB (0.1% pet), and scrapings from their personal leather products.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Results</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>All patients showed reactions to the scrapings from their personal products (+ to ++) and to TCMTB (++ to +++). Additionally, one patient was sensitised to mercapto mix and mercaptobenzothiazole (both ++), while another reacted to chromium (++), cobalt (+), 4-tert-butylphenol-formaldehyde resin (+) and colophonium (++). All patients were advised to avoid TCMTB and to be cautious with leather, synthetic leather, and varnished wood.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 \u0000 <section>\u0000 \u0000 <h3> Conclusions</h3>\u0000 \u0000 <p>If contact dermatitis related to leather exposure is suspected, patch testing with TCMTB 0.1% pet should be included, as it might be the only positive finding.</p>\u0000 </section>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":10527,"journal":{"name":"Contact Dermatitis","volume":"92 4","pages":"299-303"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8,"publicationDate":"2024-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142863073","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}