| 1. |
- Alves da Silva, Catarina, et al.
(författare)
-
Contact dermatitis in children caused by diabetes devices
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Contact Dermatitis. - : Wiley. - 0105-1873 .- 1600-0536. ; 87:5, s. 406-413
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Insulin pumps and glucose monitoring devices improve diabetes mellitus control and enhance patients' quality of life. However, a growing number of adverse cutaneous reactions related to the use of these devices have been reported. Objective: To investigate the culprits of localized contact dermatitis in paediatric patients with diabetes caused by insulin pumps and glucose monitoring devices. Methods: Retrospective analysis of 15 paediatric patients patch tested as part of a clinical investigation for skin reactions associated with insulin pumps and glucose monitoring devices. Results: Seven patients had positive patch test reactions to isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) and five had positive reactions to benzoyl peroxide (BP). Positive patch test reactions to materials from the glucose sensor and/or insulin pump were seen in 10 of the 15 patients. Three had positive reactions to adhesive remover wipe from Smith and Nephew Remove and four had reactions to EMLA plaster. Conclusion: A high share of patients showed positive reactions to IBOA and/or their medical devices (insulin pumps or glucose devices). A third of patients showed positive reactions to BP. The presence of additional unidentified allergens cannot be excluded, highlighting the importance of access to a full description of the chemical composition of the devices.
|
|
| 2. |
|
|
| 3. |
- Lejding, Tina, et al.
(författare)
-
Analysis of Hexavalent Chromium in Cement Samples From Countries Within and Outside the EU : A Study From the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug. - : Mary Ann Liebert Inc. - 1710-3568. ; 34:4, s. 323-328
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by hexavalent chromium (Cr(VI)) is often severe and difficult to treat. The content of Cr(VI) in cement can be reduced by, for example, addition of iron(II) sulfate. Since 2005 the content of Cr(VI) in cement is regulated in the EU Directive 2003/53/EC and must not exceed 2 ppm. Since this regulation came into force, ACD caused by cement has markedly been reduced. Objective: To investigate Cr(VI) and total chromium content in samples of cement from countries within and outside the EU. Methods: The members of the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group (ICDRG) were invited to participate in the study with the aim to collect cement samples from geographically different areas. The content of Cr(VI) in the samples was estimated by the diphenyl carbazide spot test, atomic absorption spectroscopy was used to assess the total chromium content. Results: Forty-five cement samples were analyzed, containing amounts of Cr(VI) from <0.1 to >70 ppm. Twenty-one samples contained >2 ppm Cr(VI), 24 contained less. Four of 17 samples from within the EU contained >2 ppm Cr(VI), that is, higher amounts than stipulated in the EU directive, as compared with 17 samples from countries outside the EU. Conclusion: In countries outside the EU, significantly more cement samples contained >2 ppm Cr(VI).
|
|
| 4. |
- Ofenloch, Robert F., et al.
(författare)
-
Allergic reactivity for different dilutions of eugenol in repeated open application test and patch testing
- 2023
-
Ingår i: Contact Dermatitis. - 0105-1873. ; 89:2, s. 95-102
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Eugenol is a known contact sensitiser included in fragrance mix I. Objective: To assess the allergic reactivity to eugenol in different concentrations using patch test as well as repeated open application test (ROAT). Methods: Overall 67 subjects from 6 European dermatology clinics participated in the study. The ROAT was performed for 21 days twice a day, applying 3 dilutions of eugenol (2.7%–0.5%) and a control. Before and after the ROAT, patch testing with 17 dilutions of eugenol (2.0%–0.00006%) and controls was performed. Results: Out of the 34 subjects with contact allergy to eugenol, 21 (61.8%) showed a positive patch test before ROAT was performed, the lowest positive concentration was 0.031%. The ROAT was positive in 19 (55.9%) of the 34 subjects, the time until a positive reaction occurred was negatively associated with the concentration of the ROAT solution, as well as with the allergic reactivity of the subjects as defined by patch testing. In the patch test after ROAT, 20 of the 34 test subjects (58.8%) showed a positive reaction. In 13 (38.2%) of the 34 test subjects, the patch test result was not reproduceable, still 4 (31.0%) of these 13 subjects developed a positive ROAT. Conclusion: Eugenol can provoke a positive patch test reaction in a very low dose; besides, this hypersensitivity may persist even if a former positive patch test is not reproduceable.
|
|
