Search

Patch testing is the only clinically applicable diagnostic method for Type IV allergy. The availability of Type IV patch test (PT) allergens in Europe, however, is currently scarce. This severely compromises adequate diagnostics of contact allergy, leading to serious consequences for the affected patients. Against this background, the European Society of Contact Dermatitis (ESCD) has created a task force (TF) (i) to explore the current availability of PT substances in different member states, (ii) to highlight some of the unique characteristics of Type IV vs. other allergens and (iii) to suggest ways forward to promote and ensure availability of high‐quality patch testing substances for the diagnosis of Type IV allergies throughout Europe. The suggestions of the TF on how to improve the availability of PT allergens are supported by the ESCD, the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, and the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology and intend to provide potential means to resolve the present medical crisis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Olanedine solution is a new antiseptic, and several cases of allergic contact dermatitis caused by the agent were reported in 2018; however, these cases were diagnosed based on positive results in 2‐day closed patch testing of Olanedine solution "as is." Objectives: To present another case of Olanedine‐induced allergic contact dermatitis and to analyze the optimal patch‐testing method for this condition. Methods: A 34‐year‐old Japanese female patient and 25 healthy control subjects were patch tested using wet filter paper, which had been treated with 15 μL Olanedine solution, and dried filter paper, which had been treated with 15 μL Olanedine solution and then dried. Results: The patient and all of the control subjects exhibited false‐positive reactions due to irritation in the 2‐day closed patch tests with wet filter paper containing Olanedine solution "as is." The tests with dried filter paper produced a positive reaction on day 7 in the patient, and negative reactions in all control subjects. Conclusions: It is preferable to perform 2‐day closed patch tests using filter paper with the test solution "as is," which had been dried before application in order to correctly diagnose antiseptic‐induced allergic contact dermatitis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Keywords: case report; colophonium; contact dermatitis; lips; paper napkin; rosin; sanitary pad EN case report colophonium contact dermatitis lips paper napkin rosin sanitary pad 377 379 3 08/16/21 20210901 NES 210901 Colophonium (CAS no. 85026-55-7), which is also called rosin (CAS no. 8050-09-7), is a common allergen used in adhesives, glazing of paper products, construction and industrial products, surface coatings, and other products. Case report, colophonium, contact dermatitis, lips, paper napkin, rosin, sanitary pad Resin acids are divided into abietic acids (abietic acid, palustric acid, levopimaric acid, and dehydroabietic acid) and pimaric acids (pimaric acid, isopimaric acid, and sandala pimaric acid).1 The positivity rate for the colophonium patch test in the Japanese baseline series from 1994 to 2018 ranged from 1.5% to 3.2%.2 Contact dermatitis on the hands caused by colophonium in paper has been reported.3,4 This is the first case of contact dermatitis on the lips caused by colophonium in disposable paper napkins. [Extracted from the article]

In the past 20 years, there have been numerous reports of skin and mucous membrane disorders allegedly caused by the use of carbonless copy paper, to such an extent that some people in Europe were refusing to work with it and concern was expressed in the European Parliament. In view of its undoubted convenience and superiority over carbon paper, the author was asked by the Commission of the European Communities for a report. Based on visits to manufacturers and users and the investigation of complaints, the conclusion is that, as exposure to the constituents of the paper during its manufacture is considerably greater than in its use and no cases have arisen in his experience in the industry, the complaints are more likely to be attributable to "sick building syndrome" than to the specific effect of any component of the paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Finn Chambers AQUA (FCA) is a development of the Finn Chambers (FC) test system in which the test chambers are mounted on a moisture‐resistant adhesive patch. FCA has pre‐fixed filter papers. Because the use of FCA does not require any extra taping or use of separate filter papers, a change from FC to FCA chambers may be beneficial for both patients and patch test technicians. Objectives: To investigate whether there are any differences regarding detection of contact allergy when simultaneous patch testing is performed with FC and FCA. Materials and Methods: Results from 434 dermatitis patients simultaneously tested with 10 allergens in both FC and FCA were evaluated. Results: There were no significant differences regarding detection of positive reactions between the two test systems. There were significantly more doubtful reactions to methylisothiazolinone, fragrance mix I and hydroperoxides of linalool when testing with FCA. We only observed significantly more doubtful reactions in FC regarding nickel(II)sulfate. Irritant reactions to formaldehyde were also significantly more common when using FCA. Conclusion: The FC and FCA had good agreement in detection of positive reactions. However, the results including doubtful and irritant reactions justify further research regarding optimization of the dose. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article discusses a case series involving eight patients who underwent patch testing for suspected cyanoacrylate contact allergy post-surgery. The patients were tested using a conventional patch testing method as well as a modified method called tape stripping. The results showed that tape stripping increased the sensitivity of patch testing to cyanoacrylates, particularly in cases where the conventional method yielded negative or doubtful reactions. The study also found that ethyl cyanoacrylate (ECA) was positive in five cases, suggesting potential cross-reactivity or co-sensitization. The authors conclude that tape stripping prior to patch testing can be a useful and pragmatic method for testing with medical adhesives when the suspected allergens are not commercially available. [Extracted from the article]

Background Objectives Methods Results Conclusion 2‐Hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) was added into the European baseline series (EBS) in 2019. There is limited data regarding the frequency, relevance, and sources of exposure to HEMA.To investigate the frequency and clinical relevance of positive reactions to HEMA in the EBS in Israel, and explore sources of exposure.Retrospective cohort study that included all patients who underwent patch testing with the EBS in a tertiary center in Israel between 2020 and 2023. Positive reactions to HEMA were stratified by sex, six age groups, and year of study. Sources of exposure to HEMA as well as occupational data were recorded.A total of 1671 consecutive patients underwent HEMA patch testing, with 135 (8.1%) showing positive reactions to HEMA (130 females, 5 males). The prevalence in women (11.0%) was significantly higher compared to men (1.0%) (p < 0.001). Stratification by age and sex revealed the highest frequency of HEMA sensitivity of 16.7% among women younger than 30 years of age, with odds ratio of 2.3 (95%CI: 1.6–3.3, p < 0.001) compared to older women. There was an increase in frequency among women between the years 2022 and 2023 when compared to 2020–2021 (OR 1.7, 95%CI: 1.5–2.1, p < 0.01) attributable to COVID‐19 pandemic and social restrictions. Among men the frequency fluctuations over the study period and age categories were nonsignificant. 111 (84%) were judged to be of clinical relevance and nail cosmetics was responsible for 95% of them. Of 111 patients with relevant reaction (110 females, 1 males), 20 (18%) had occupational contact dermatitis (18 nails stylists, 2 dentists). Other culprit products included sanitary pads (n = 4), medical adhesives (n = 3), and paints (n = 2).We report the highest frequency of HEMA sensitivity to date of 8.1%, that was most common among young women and in vast majority of cases was attributable to nail cosmetics. Our findings reflect the popularity of nail cosmetics in Israel as well as the global trend of increasing sensitivity to (meth)acrylates. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction Objectives Methods Results Conclusion Tert‐butylphenol (TBP) derivatives, antioxidants in adhesives and diabetes devices, may provoke allergic contact dermatitis (ACD).The objective of this study is to report sensitization to TBP derivatives in medical devices and to highlight that tert‐butylhydroquinone (BHQ) and tert‐butylcatechol (TBC) are potential screeners in this regard.Fifteen patients with ACD from adhesives and diabetes devices were patch tested to different TBPs: BHQ 1% pet., TBC 0.25% pet., BHA 2% pet., BHT 2% pet., 4‐tert‐butylphenol (TBP) 1% pet. and 2,4‐di‐tert‐butylphenol (di TBP) 1% pet. The culprit devices (medical adhesives, sanitary pads, diabetes devices) and TBP patch preparations were analysed using gas chromatography‐mass spectrometry (GC–MS).BHQ (9/13), TBC (7/13), and to a lesser extent BHT (3/15), BHA (2/15) and TBP (2/13) gave positive reactions. Seven patients had developed ACD from adhesives and diabetes devices, respectively, and one patient from sanitary pads. GC–MS analyses of the medical devices and patch test materials confirmed the presence of the patch‐test positive TBPs, or chemically related derivatives, or, interestingly, tert‐butylbenzoquinones (BBQ) were found, that is, spontaneously formed, highly reactive TBP metabolites, likely (pseudo‐) cross reacting with the patch tested TBPs.TBPs might be overlooked sensitizers in medical devices, and BHQ and TBC are potential screeners in this regard. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports on the increasing use of moist toilet papers, which introduced primarily for babies, by adults for cleansing perianal skin. Based on the results of a series of clinical studies, disposable baby wipes were mild to the skin. However, it was pointed out that their use can be responsible for allergic contact dermatitis.

Dermatitis is reported from slimicides added to wood pulp slurry in a paper mill. The active constituents of the slimicides involved were bis-l, 4-bromoacetoxy-2-butene and 2, 3-dichloro-4-bromotetrahydrothiophene-1, 1-dioxide. Wood pulp slimicides include many chemicals which are highly irritant and potentially sensitizing to the skin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Dermatitis is reported from slimicides added to wood pulp slurry in a paper mill. The active constituents of the slimicides involved were bis-l,4-bromoacetoxy-2-butene and 2,3-dichloro-4-bromotetrahydrothiophene-1,1-dioxide. Wood pulp slimicides include many chemicals which are highly irritant and potentially sensitizing to the skin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Carbonless copy paper, or 'no carbon required' (NCR) paper, has often been implicated as the cause of skin, respiratory, or general symptoms, but allergy has been verified in only a cases. A 43-year-old machinist whose work involved the manufacture of NCR paper developed occupational dermatitis on the hands. On patch testing, both the NCR paper and 1 of the chemicals used to produce the microcapsules of the NCR paper, namely diethylenetriamine (DETA), provoked an allergic reaction. .Analysis of the paper showed that it contained enough DETA to induce allergic contact dermatitis. People who handle NCR paper and develop symptoms of contact dermatitis should be patch tested with DETA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article focuses on slimicides that are agents preventing growth of bacteria, mildew fungus, yeast fungus, protozoa and algae, in the paper-pulp industry. The pulp industry in Sweden published a list of 646 marketed products used in this industry. Several of the products contain common ingredients. The products are divided into, fillers, wet-end additives, precipitation and retention agents, dispersing and flotation agents, foam inhibitors etc. The slimicide products are commonly delivered with the active component in a concentration of 5-80 percent. Welting agents or solvents are often added to the product before it is added to the pulp.

The first detailed description of an epicutaneous test in a case of allergy was probably in 1847 by Städeler, a chemist at the University of Göttingen. A review of the history of the tests is given; touch and other investigations such as Städeler's blotting paper strip, Jadassohn's application method (1895) and Fabre's blotting-paper square (1897). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An over 2 × fold increase in para-aminoazobenzene allergy was observed in patients with allergic contact dermatitis during the years 1990-1991. Presuming that an increase in colour-printed news-papers might be a new recognized source of clinical allergy to azo dyes, patch tests were performed in 32 patients with an established p-aminoazobenzene allergy using a series of important azo dyes used in offset printing ink (Pigment Yellow 12, Pigment Yellow 13, Pigment Red 53, Pigment Red 57), as well as with dye-containing inks and specimens of colour-printed newspaper containing these azo dyes. In 25 out of the 32 patients (78%), positive patch tests were seen to textile an dyes, in particular in Disperse Orange 3(24 patients) In none of the 32 patients were reactions observed to the azo dyes used in printing ink, to the inks used or to the colour-printed paper specimens. indicating that these product were apparently not a cause of Contact dermatitis in our group of patients with azo dye sensitization. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A nonatopic Female secretary developed hand dermatitis after 1 year of full-time work with telefax paper. Her dermatitis improved on sick leave and vacation and relapsed at work. Patch testing showed allergic reactions to several fragrances, balsam of Peru, colophony and neomycin. In 3 patch test sessions, her own telefax papers gave a doubtful reaction which persisted for 4 days, but it could not be determined whether the reactions were allergic or irritant. The colophony content of the telefax paper was about 1% and it was possible that colophony in the telefax paper was responsible for the weak patch test reactions. Accordingly, the contact dermatitis would have been allergic. The patient has now been relocated, does not handle telefax paper, and is symptomless. We concluded that our patient bad an occupational hand contact dermatitis induced by telefax paper and possibly caused by colophony allergy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Copenhagen Telephone Company uses 800,000-900,000 sets of no carbon required paper per year. Since 1977 the employees have related itching, dermatitis and symptoms from the mucous membranes to contact with the paper. In 35 employees a total of 4000 epicutaneous tests were performed with negative results. A questionnaire study of 2400 in the company revealed a close relationship between the symptoms and the work intensity with the NCR paper. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Bisphenol (BP‐)A is a chemical used in Europe to produce polycarbonate plastics and epoxy resin or as colour developer in thermal paper. Due to its toxicity, BPA presence was restricted by European regulations. Therefore, substitute chemicals are replacing BPA. Objective: To assess the allergenic sensitizing potential of 27 substitutes to BPA used in the industry. Methods: The expression of two costimulatory molecules and six cytokines were analysed by flow cytometry in mouse bone marrow‐derived dendritic cells (BMDCs) exposed to the chemicals. Results: All substances except one induced overexpression of at least one receptor and were thus identified as having allergenic sensitizing potential. Based on the BMDC model, they were classified as extreme (1 out of 27), strong (20 out of 27) and moderate (5 out of 27) sensitizers. BPA was classified as a moderate sensitizer and BPF was the only substitute classified as a non‐sensitizer. The more potent substitutes induced more than 2‐fold secretion of CCL3, CCL4 and/or CCL5 by dendritic cells. Conclusion: Most of the BPA substitutes tested in this study have an allergenic sensitizing potential; 24 of them being more potent than BPA itself. Only BPE, BPF and 2,4‐BPS appeared to be weaker sensitizers than BPA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The results of patch tests with colophony in the standard series between 1983 and 1987 were analyzed. 5521 patients were tested in the Department of Dermatology, Hamburg, while 354 were tested in other clinics and private practices. Colophony was positive in 2.4% and 11.9%, respectively. Out of 62 patients in the 1st group and 75 in a 2nd group tested subsequently with 6 unmodified types of colophony and 12 types of modified-colophony products, 17 did not react to the unmodified material. However, most of them responded to 1 or more of the modified products. In the enlarged group (n = 75), reactions to Abitol® and the maleic-modified products were the most frequently obtained. As the authors are convinced that the actual incidence of allergic reactions to modified-colophony products is underestimated, they propose to test a mixture of 3 materials: Chinese colophony (today 50% of the world market) and 2 derivatives (modified colophony), instead of the 60% mix of unmodified colophony, in the standard series. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We describe 4 adults with an allergic contact dermatitis for moist baby toilet tissues, being used either for their personal hygiene or for their babies (children). The allergen proved to be the preservative mixture of methylchloroisothiazolinone and methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI). Allergic contact dermatitis from moist toilet paper has been infrequently reported but is probably not rare. The cases we describe here have been observed over a short period of 6 months. The question arises if the use of MCI/MI as a preservative, still often used in leave-on products, should not be abandoned from cosmetics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a case study of a small case series of frictional dermatitis caused by occupational paper and cardboard. The patients were diagnosed with primary hand eczema characterized by initial skin dryness, scaling, and fissures. The article also discusses history of atopic dermatitis, occupational hyperkeratoses, and disease susceptibility of shoemakers.

This article invest investigates a case study of colophony with paper as a cause of hand eczema in a 36 year old painter. Patch tests was positive with extracts of newspapaer and newsprint paper. Test reports confirmed facial dermatitis due to tearing off large amounts of perforated computer paper. Dermatitis cleared on stopping contact with the paper.

The occurrence of allergic contact dermatitis from diazo paper is reported. The case was found in a person who had been using diazo paper to reproduce documents. A vesicular dermatitis was found to develop in him. It is stated that the histology of the diazo paper patch test has showed typical eczematous change. Patch tests were found to be positive with para-aminobenzene, diazodimethylamine and diazodiethylamine. The dermatitis was found to be cleared completely after contact with the paper was stopped.

We inform about a case of occupational allergic contact dermatitis (OACD) to methyldibromoglutaronitrile (MDBGN) in industrial hand degreasing moist toilet paper. To our knowledge, this is the first published case of OACD to MDBGN in industrial hand degreasing toilet papers. A cause–effect relationship seems to be clearly established. We believe that physicians must keep in mind that MDBGN is a strong allergen either mixed or as a single component of industrial moist toilet papers. MDBGN must be taken into account for OACD at an appropriate work environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article cites five case reports related to contact allergy to moist toilet paper. In the first case a 45 year old man with perianal dermatitis and vesicular hand dermatitis was patch tested with the European standard series, revealing allergy to kathon CG. He was using a moist toilet paper which was suspected to have contained kathon and the moment he stopped using it he was cured. In the second case a 41 year old woman developed acute allergic contact dermatitis around the anus, which spread to the trunk, legs and face after twice using moist toilet paper.

A 36-year-old man had widespread vesicular fissured eczema of the perianal and genital areas which had recently spread to the lower limbs, trunk and even the face. For the last 7 years, his perianal fissures had been treated with corticosteroids creams and cleaning with moist toilet paper. He noted a sudden worsening of the dermatitis a few days before his outpatient visit to the department of the author. He was advised to discontinue cleaning with the tissue paper, which led to rapid improvement in the lesion.

From 15 May to 15 December 1994, 2943 patients suspected of having contact dermatitis (1955 women, 988 men) were patch tested with methyldibromoglutaronitrile 0.3%, 0.1% and .05% pet. 119 patients (4.0% women, 4.1% men, 3.8%) proved to be allergic. 71% of the reactions were considered to be relevant. In 2/3 of the patients, causative products were cosmetics, in 1/3 moistened toilet tissues. Testing with methyldibromoglutaronitrile at lower concentrations 0.05% and 0.1%) and with commercial allergens (Euxyl® K 400 and methyldibromoglutaronitrile, both containing methyldibromoglutaronitrile 0.1%), resulted in a number of false-negative reactions. All preservatives in the European standard series had lower scores than the 4% positive reactions to methyldibromoglutaronitrile (formaldehyde 2.0%. MCI/MI (Kathon® CG) 3.2% parabens, 1.0% quaternium-15 1.3%). It is concluded that methydibromoglutaronitrile (present in the commercial preservative Euxyl® K 400) is an important contact allergen in the Netherlands in cosmetics and moistened toilet tissues. It should be added to cosmetics series and to proctological series. The optimal test concentration is unknow, but may be 0.3%. pet. Th concentration of 0.1% methyldibromoglutaronitrile in the currently available commercial allergens appears to be too low, resulting in a number of false-negative reactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article reports two cases of allergic contact dermatitis due to diethylenetriamine. After one month of the installation of a new machine to be used in the manufacturing of microcapsulecoated carbonless copy paper (CCP), in a paper factory, a man developed hand dermatitis. Patch testing showed two positive allergic test reaction with 2 of 19 of the CCP tested. The testing was then performed with the ingredients used for CCP production. Capsule dispersion substance and microcapsule paste gave a 2 positive allergic reaction.

In this paper, we explain why late-appearing patch test reactions to carvone followed by a positive retest within 3 days, do not need to be equivalent with active sensitization. Late-appearing patch test reactions to carvone do not need to be signs of active sensitization Keywords: allergic contact dermatitis; CAS 6485-40-1; contact allergy; delayed hypersensitivity; dilutions; mint-tasting flavor; retest EN allergic contact dermatitis CAS 6485-40-1 contact allergy delayed hypersensitivity dilutions mint-tasting flavor retest 207 209 3 08/04/23 20230901 NES 230901 A controlled and randomized use test with l-carvone in a toothpaste on individuals with or without contact allergy to carvone was performed.[1] One week before the use test, a patch test with l-carvone was performed in 37 volunteers. [Extracted from the article]

This article presents the case of a 53-year old female former hairstylist with no personal and family history of skin disease or atopy who was diagnosed with allergic contact dermatitis due to diazo copy paper. She had worked for 4 years in heliographic printing. She copied original drawings using the diazo-method, and was therefore in contact with copy paper coated with diazodiethylaniline chloride. 2 weeks after starting the job, a squamous dermatitis appeared on the tips of the thumbs, index and middle fingers of both hands, which were exposed to diazo paper. Away from work on treatment, the dermatitis resolved in a few days. After starting work again, she developed dermatitis at the same sites 3 weeks later.

Keywords: adhesive; allergic contact dermatitis; case report; Finn Chambers AQUA; modified colophonium; patch test Allergic reactions to traditional Finn Chambers are mainly caused by contact allergy to aluminium, and, in most cases, are verified by positive patch test reactions to aluminium salts.[[1], [6], [11]] Our two cases, however, had negative test results with aluminium chloride hexahydrate, making aluminium contact allergy unlikely. In one report, a diagnosis of aluminium contact allergy was made; however, aluminium salts were not tested. Adhesive, allergic contact dermatitis, case report, Finn Chambers AQUA, modified colophonium, patch test. [Extracted from the article]

The article presents a case in which the patient, an office clerk got an irritant vesicular rash on the palms which spread to the back and sides of her fingers. Her work entailed day-long handling of significant quantities of Carbonless copy paper and carbon paper and operating a visual display unit. Initial patch tests to a standard battery and to carbonless copy paper gave positive allergic reactions to nickel sulphate 5%, cobalt chloride 1% and fragrance mix 8%, but no reaction to the paper handled. Further tests indicated an allergic reaction to crystal violet lactone present in the carbonless copy paper.

This article focuses on a case study of 56-year-old man who was suffering from vesicular eczema on the palms of both hands and on the volar sides of the fingers. From his past history it was found out that for 3 years, he had worked in a factory where diazosensitized paper was produced. At work, he was exposed continuously to 2 diazo compound containing Radex DL and 5M9. It was observed that during leave, his eczema improved. On patch testing with azodyes and photochemical results were negative. On additional patch testing, patient showed positive response to Radex DL and 5M9 solutions. It was suggested that contact dermatitis in patient occurred due to Radex photocopy paper.

Since the early 1960s, there have been occasional reports of contact allergies caused by diazo copy paper. The allergens most commonly identified have been the unexposed diazo compounds, particularly p-diazodimethylaniline zinc chloride double salt, and thiourea or dimethylthiourea. Diazomethylpyrrolidinobenzene and 2,7-dihydroxynaphthalene have also been reported. Diagnosis of contact allergy due to diazo copy paper is often difficult, since the papers may not only contain the substances mentioned, but up to 40 other constituents.

a 43 year-old male Technical Officer was seen in September 1985 when he gave history of skin trouble since the age of 18 years, when he reacted severely to sticking paper following appendicectomy. He complained especially of facial dermatitis which had been recurrent for several years. The contact dermatitis of his face and hands was due to pinus radiata sawdust with which he came in contact in a woodwork hobby. A patch test to a perfumed handkerchief was negative, but it seems more likely that the condition was the result of repeated contact with the perfume in the handkerchief.

Presents a clinical case which identified azo dyes as skin allergens in carbonless copy paper manufacturing. Presenting signs and symptoms; Results of diagnostic examinations; Therapeutic options.

Findings in two persons with allergic contact dermatitis to slimicides used in the paper industry are presented. Both subjects worked as technical sales consultants and visited paper mills. They would come into occasional contact with solutions containing biocides during servicing and sampling activities and were aware of a skin eruption affecting the flexural wrists, anterior thighs and ankles when they were in contact with certain biocides. Only one subject was allergic to Kathon.

This article presents a case study of a 5-year-old bank clerk who developed a squamous dermatitis on the tips of his right thumb and index finger, which were continually exposed to paper money. This worsened in 1989, after new German banknotes were issued. It improved within a few weeks when he was not at work. A few days after resuming work, dermatitis reappeared in the same places. During the next 5 years, the eczema continued to worsen when he was in contact with banknotes. However, patch tests were performed to see the effective change in his skin.

The article presents a case report of a 37-year-old orthopaedic surgeon who consulted the Department of Dermatology for widespread eczema. His eczema started on the arms and spread to the neck and entire body. He suspected paper-based surgical clothing as the cause. The eczema deteriorated during periods of intensive work and improved during days out of the operating theatre. The patient also reacted positively to both the acetone extract and the extract in pet. When he subsequently reverted to textile-based surgical clothing, his contact dermatitis improved.

This article discusses about a patient who developed itchy dermatitis in hands due to exposure to phenolformaldehyde resin. The patient had to remove the end product from the press. Recently he developed an itchy dermatitis of the dorsa of the hands and was patch tested. He reacted to balsam of Peru, the phenolformaldehyde resin used for impregnation of the paper sheets. The patient was then tested with a number of possible monomers and reacted to all of them. It is difficult to decide which of the substances acted as inducer of contact sensitization in the patient. It depends on the sensitizing capacity of each in the resin vehicle and on the effective mode of exposure.

In December 1990. a paper mill worker presented with a 3 month history of sore itching upper and lower eyelids, with erythema and scaling. The reaction occurred at least 4 hour after finishing work and lasted for more than 24 hour. It began only after the paper mill changed biocides to Busan 79 and Busan 1058. Patch testing with Finn Chambers on Scanpor tape was negative to the European standard series and Busan 79 0.01% pet. The paper mill changed the biocide, and he has remained free of dermatitis since.

This article presents a case of allergic contact dermatitis on the hands from chloromethylisothiazolinone in moist toilet paper. A 28-year old married woman had developed fissured lesions on her hands which became more severe with the development of erythematous, pruriginous, vesicular lesions. She reportedly used moist toilet paper for her baby's hygiene. She was patch tested with a standard series, which was positive to Kathon CG (5-chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one). A patch test with the moist toilet paper was also positive. Out of 19 brands of moist toilet paper whose information was collected from Spain, eight did not contain Kathon CG. The case is therefore concerned with a patient using moist toilet paper not of her own hygiene but for that of her baby, resulting in allergic contact dermatitis on the hands, a hitherto unreported localization.

This article reports a case of contact sensitivity to acrylates and methacrylates, in a non-atopic women having an occupational history of recurrent acute vesiculopapular hand dermatitis, accompanied by severe itching and burning. It improved on holidays and on treatment with a topical corticosteroid. The patient was advised to use 4H gloves. This patient reacted only to materials she had came in contact with at work, glycidyl methacrylate ethoxyethyl acrylate and not to any of the other acrylates tested.

Two female patients with histories of contact dermatitis to nickel-containing jewelry (dime-thyiglyoxime test positive) failed to react to patch testing with 5 % nickel sulphate in yellow petrolatum. Further patch testing was performed with nickel sulphate 2.5 % and 5 % in water and with 2.5% in DMSO 50%, but no positive reactions were obtained. An intradermal test with a 1/10,000 dilution in water was also negative. Both patients were again patch tested with 10% nickel sulphate in yellow petrolatum, which resulted in ++ reactions after 48 and 96 hours.

A 41-year-old man developed hand dermatitis, which has persisted for 4 years. The dermatitis commenced on the dorsa of the hands and spread to the palms and later to the feet. He had previous contact with cement and other building materials and his work had been photocopying architectural and technical plans for the last 5 years. Sensitivity to thiourea has also been observed in two patients working with plan printing materials and presenting with photodermatitis. Patch testing with thiourea showed sensitivity, in one case with and the other without exposure of the test site to light. Dermatitis and photosensitivity settled slowly after contact with thiourea ceased.

Presents a letter to the editor in response to an article on manufacturing of carbonless paper, published in the journal "Contact Dermatitis."

Lists the papers used for the completion of the thesis on contact allergy to perfumes in Denmark. Changes in pattern of sensitization; Patch test with markers of fragrance contact allergy; Time-dose-response relationship for elicitation of contact dermatitis in isoeugenol allergic individuals.

Discusses the case of a female patient with frictional contact dermatitis due to paper tissues. Itchy erythema in the periorbital and perioral areas; Discoid eczema; Mechanical irritation of the skin.

This article discusses common type of allergic contact sensitivity to flame retardant. According to a 29-year-old professional actress, while playing a particular role, she developed irritation over her entire body, which was not associated with the development of any rash. Irritation was, however, associated with some nasal discomfort, and a scaling rash plus swelling round her eyes. It was revealed that while playing the part, she was showered with petals made of crepe paper treated with flame retardant, which caused allergy. Extensive patch testing revealed allergic reactions to nickel sulphate, cobalt chloride and formaldehyde.

This article reports a case study of allergic contact dermatitis caused due to the effect of newsprint paper. A 30-year-old man working as a newspaperman developed a severe hand eczema every summer for the last 5 years. On patch testing with printed and unprinted newspaper it was found out that patient showed positive response in both the cases but there is no significant difference between the two. When testing with ethanol and dichloromethane the patient showed positive reactions. The patient is now working with his gloves on, even in summer.