| 1. |
|
|
| 2. |
- Isaksson, Marléne, et al.
(författare)
-
Contact Allergy to Dental Materials and Implants
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Contact Dermatitis : Sixth Edition - Sixth Edition. - Cham : Springer International Publishing. - 9783030363352 - 9783030363345 ; , s. 1121-1159
-
Bokkapitel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Dental professionals and dental patients are exposed to the same sensitizers, but the outcome is very different. Dental professionals suffer predominantly from irritant contact dermatitis and to a lesser degree from allergic contact dermatitis to acrylates and rubber products. Dental patients rarely have allergic contact stomatitis. In this chapter, the reader will learn about the multiple factors that lead to irritant contact dermatitis and also about the major sensitizers, e.g., methacrylates in dentin bonding agents, dental composite resins (DCR), and prostheses, in addition to rubber chemicals, metals, fragrances, and disinfectants. The various sensitizers that may give lichenoid reactions in patients are also discussed.
|
|
| 3. |
- Isaksson, Marléne, et al.
(författare)
-
Exclusion of Disperse Orange 3 is possible from the textile dye mix present in the Swedish baseline patch test series. A study by the Swedish Contact Dermatitis Research Group
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Contact Dermatitis. - : Wiley. - 0105-1873 .- 1600-0536. ; 88:1, s. 54-59
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background The textile dye mix (TDM) 6.6% in petrolatum 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 para-phenylenediamine (PPD)-allergic dermatitis patients have been positive to DO 3. There has been a discussion to exclude DO 3 from TDM 6.6% because of strong simultaneous reactions to TDM and PPD. Objectives To study if DO 3 can be excluded from TDM 6.6%. Methods Patch tests were performed on 1481 dermatitis patients with TDM 6.6%, TDM 7.0% (without DO 3 but the other disperse dyes at 1.0% each), DO 3 1.0%, and PPD 1.0% pet. Results Contact allergy to TDM 6.6% was 3.6% and to TDM 7.0% was 3.0%. All 26 DO 3-positive patients were positive to PPD. The 44 patients positive to TDM 7.0% plus the 13 positive to PPD and TDM 6.6% but negative to TDM 7.0% were 57, outnumbering the 53 positive to TDM 6.6%. Conclusion TDM 7.0% can replace TDM 6.6% in the Swedish baseline series, since TDM 7.0% together with PPD 1.0% will detect patients with textile dye allergy.
|
|
| 4. |
- Linauskiene, Kotryna, et al.
(författare)
-
Patch test results to extracts of synthetic garments in textile dye positive patients
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Contact Dermatitis. - : Wiley. - 0105-1873 .- 1600-0536. ; 87:4, s. 325-330
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Disperse dyes (DDs) are the most prevalent causes of textile-related allergic contact dermatitis and are used for colouring synthetic textile materials based on fibres such as polyester, acrylic, acetate and polyamide. Eight DDs are included in a textile dye mix (TDM) 6.6% petrolatum (pet.) in the European baseline patch test series. Objectives: The aim of this study was to patch test TDM 6.6% pet. positive individuals with the extracts of synthetic fibre clothes that do not contain any of the pure DDs present in the TDM 6.6% to study the reactivity pattern. Methods: Seventy-three TDM-positive former patients tested between 2012 and 2017 at the Department of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology in Malmö, Sweden were invited to join the study, 10 participated. Twenty-four textile items (collected in nine countries in Europe, Asia and North America in 2012) were extracted in dichloromethane. The TDM 6.6% was patch tested simultaneously with the 24 textile item preparations in petrolatum made from the extracts. Prior to patch testing the participants filled the 7-question questionnaire regarding possible symptoms from textile exposure. Results: Ten individuals, agreed to join the study. Eight of them reacted to TDM 6.6%. Nine participants reacted to 20 of 24 extracts. One reacted to 19 extracts, another to 14, 3 to 5 extracts, 1 to 4, 1 to 3 extracts and 2 to 2 extracts. One was negative to all tested preparations including TDM 6.6%. The participants mainly reacted to six textile extracts. All controls tested negatively to tested extracts. Four individuals of the 10 TDM-allergic individuals previously had had problems after wearing clothes. Four out of the 10 participants had had atopic eczema in childhood. All women had dyed their hair with permanent hair dyes but none of the males. Conclusion: TDM-positive patients react to textile extracts made from synthetic garments, even if they do not contain any of the pure DDs present in TDM 6.6%. More studies are needed to pin-point the culprit haptens in these extracts.
|
|
| 5. |
- Linauskiene, K., et al.
(författare)
-
Solvent Orange 60 is a potent contact sensitizer in occupational and everyday life
- 2018
-
Ingår i: Contact Dermatitis. - : Wiley. - 0105-1873. ; 79:3, s. 123-126
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- BackgroundSolvent 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. ObjectivesTo report the cause of the dermatitis in the 10 patients and to describe our first case with occupational SO 60 contact allergy. MethodsIn 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. ResultsTen patients, 2 males and 8 females, aged 43 to 71years, 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 >20cm 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. ConclusionsSO 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.
|
|
| 6. |
- Mowitz, Martin, et al.
(författare)
-
N,N-dimethylacrylamide—A new sensitizer in the FreeStyle Libre glucose sensor
- 2019
-
Ingår i: Contact Dermatitis. - : Wiley. - 0105-1873 .- 1600-0536. ; 81:1, s. 27-31
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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.
|
|
| 7. |
- Siemund, Ingrid, et al.
(författare)
-
Contact Allergy to Two Aluminum Salts in Consecutively Patch-Tested Dermatitis Patients
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Dermatitis. - 1710-3568. ; 33:1, s. 31-35
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Background: Recently, aluminum chloride hexahydrate (ACH) 10.0% petrolatum (pet) was recommended for patch testing to detect aluminum contact allergy. Aluminum lactate (AL) may be as reliable a test substance as ACH. Objective: We aimed to investigate the frequencies of aluminum allergy when ACH and AL were used in patch testing consecutive patients. Methods: Petrolatum preparations of ACH 10.0% and AL 12.0% were added to the baseline series in 2010-2017. Aluminum chloride hexahydrate 10.0% pet was added to the children baseline series from July 1, 2012, to December 31, 2017. Results: A total of 5448 patients were patch tested with the extended baseline series and 196 children with the extended children baseline series. Forty-eight of the 5448 adults (0.9%) and 10 of the 196 children (5.1%) were diagnosed with aluminum contact allergy. A significant difference was found between the aluminum allergy frequencies in children and adults patch tested with ACH in 2013-2017 (P < 0.001). The difference between the frequencies of contact allergies for the 2 aluminum salts is not statistically significant. Conclusions: Patch testing with ACH and AL demonstrated similar contact allergy frequencies. To detect aluminum allergy, patch testing with ACH 10.0% pet is recommended. Aluminum chloride hexahydrate 10.0% pet should be considered for inclusion in baseline series for patch testing adults and children.
|
|
| 8. |
- Stenton, Joanna, et al.
(författare)
-
Patch testing with a textile dye mix with and without Disperse Orange 3
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Contact Dermatitis. - : Wiley. - 0105-1873 .- 1600-0536. ; 83:5, s. 387-390
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Sukakul, Thanisorn, et al.
(författare)
-
Contact allergy to oxidized linalool and oxidized limonene : Patch testing in consecutive patients with dermatitis
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Contact Dermatitis. - : Wiley. - 0105-1873 .- 1600-0536. ; 86:1, s. 15-24
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- 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.
|
|
