Search

The consensus-based guideline "Diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of hand eczema (HE)" provides concrete instructions and recommendations for diagnosis, prevention, and therapy of HE based on an evidence- and consensus-based approach. The guideline was created based on the German guideline "Management von Handekzemen" from 2009 and the current guideline of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis (ESCD) "Guidelines for diagnosis, prevention, and treatment of hand eczema" from 2022. The general goal of the guideline is to provide dermatologists and allergologists in practice and clinics with an accepted, evidence-based decision-making tool for selecting and conducting suitable and sufficient therapy for patients with hand eczema. The guideline is based on two Cochrane reviews of therapeutic and preventive interventions for HE. The remaining chapters were mainly developed and consented based on non-systematic literature research by the expert group. The expert group consisted of members of allergological and occupational dermatological professional associations and working groups, a patient representative, and methodologists. The proposals for recommendations and key statements were consented by using a nominal group process during a consensus conference on September 15, 2022. The structured consensus-building process was professionally moderated. This guideline is valid until February 22, 2028., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft.)

This publication is the second part of the German-language S3 guideline on urticaria. It covers the management of urticaria and should be used together with Part 1 of the guideline on classification and diagnosis. This publication was prepared according to the criteria of the AWMF on the basis of the international English-language S3 guideline with special consideration of health system conditions in German-speaking countries. Chronic urticaria has a high impact on the quality of life and daily activities of patients. Therefore, if causal factors cannot be eliminated, effective symptomatic treatment is necessary. The recommended first-line treatment is to administer new generation, non-sedating H1 antihistamines. If the standard dose is not sufficiently effective, the dose should be increased up to fourfold. For patients who do not respond to this treatment, the second-line treatment in addition to antihistamines in the treatment algorithm is omalizumab and, if this treatment fails, ciclosporin. Other low-evidence therapeutic agents should only be used if all treatments in the treatment algorithm agreed upon by the guideline group fail. Both the benefit-risk profile and cost should be considered. Corticosteroids are not recommended for long-term treatment due to their inevitable severe side effects., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft.)

The lifetime prevalence of urticaria, a severe allergic disease, is almost 20%. It not only limits the quality of life of those affected, but also their general performance at work and in their daily activities. This publication is the first section of the Urticaria Guideline. It covers the classification and diagnosis of urticaria, taking into account the major advances in research into its causes, triggering factors and pathomechanisms. It also addresses strategies for the efficient diagnosis of the different subtypes of urticaria. This is crucial for individual, patient-oriented treatment, which is covered in the second part of the guideline, published separately. This German-language guideline was developed according to the criteria of the AWMF on the basis of the international English-language S3 guideline with special consideration of health system characteristics in the German-speaking countries. This first part of the guideline describes the classification of urticaria, distinguishing spontaneously occurring wheals (hives) and angioedema from forms of urticaria with inducible symptoms. Urticaria is defined as sudden onset of wheals, angioedema, or both, but is to be distinguished from conditions in which wheals occur as a short-term symptom, such as anaphylaxis. The diagnosis is based on (a limited number of) laboratory tests, but especially on medical history. In addition, validated instruments are available to measure the severity, activity and course of the disease., (© 2023 The Authors. Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft.)

Contact dermatitis is an inflammation of the epidermis and dermis at the site of exposure triggered by external agents. The two main forms are irritant and allergic contact dermatitis, which cause significant health and socioeconomic costs in addition to a marked reduction in quality of life. The anamnesis and the clinical picture are decisive for the necessary diagnostic measures. The most accurate possible diagnostic classification of contact dermatitis by means of allergological testing is important for disease management, since not only classical eczema therapy but also avoidance of the exogenous triggering factors are of great importance here. The choice of therapy should be based on the acuity, clinical severity, morphology of the lesions and localization of the contact dermatitis. A combination of basic therapy, topical, physical, and systemic therapy adapted to the patient's needs is required, whereby not all forms of therapy must be carried out simultaneously but can be used in a varying manner. Primary, secondary, and tertiary prevention strategies aim at the recognition of the triggering noxae or allergens with subsequent contact avoidance or minimization. The present S1-guideline on contact dermatitis is primarily intended to provide dermatologists, allergologists and physicians working in allergology and occupational dermatology with a decision-making aid for the selection and implementation of suitable and sufficient diagnostics, therapy, and prevention., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft.)

In recent decades, the incidence of allergic diseases has dramatically increased, by now affecting a large percentage of the population. For a long time, allergen avoidance was considered the most crucial measure in primary allergy prevention. However, studies have increasingly shown that exposure to allergens is an essential prerequisite for the development of immunological tolerance. Diagnostic workup is based on patient history, skin tests, and measurement of specific IgE antibodies. The introduction of component-based diagnostic workup offer an option to differentiate between primary sensitization and cross-reactivity caused by sensitization to panallergens or sensitization to cross-reactive carbohydrate epitopes. Symptomatic treatment only leads to temporary relief of allergic symptoms. By contrast, specific immunotherapy (SIT) may have long-lasting therapeutic effects and potentially even result in a complete cure. The selection of allergens for SIT is guided by the principle of major allergens. It is recommended to use those preparations that have been proven safe and effective in controlled clinical studies. With respect to subcutaneous immunotherapy, a host of tested and approved extracts are available for a wide range of different allergens. Large clinical trials have also confirmed the efficacy of sublingual immunotherapy with grass and also birch pollen extracts, which has led to the official approval of some preparations containing these allergens., (© 2015 Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft (DDG). Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Pressure urticaria as a subform of physical urticaria is rare and treatment is often difficult. Established therapeutic regimes include antihistamines (generally exceeding approved dosages in order to achieve a therapeutic benefit) or antihistamines combined with montelukast. Complete relief of symptoms is difficult., Patients and Methods: We used dapsone as an early therapeutic alternative in the event of treatment failure and established a standardized therapeutic regime at our clinic. We surveyed 31 patients retrospectively who had received dapsone between 2003-2009., Results: In 74 % of patients in whom symptoms persisted despite established therapies, the results of treatment with dapsone were good or very good. Longer-term pressure urticaria and the co-existence of a chronic spontaneous urticaria were associated with a smaller benefit (p<0.05). No significant effects were found related to age, gender, duration of therapy, side-effects, or Met-Hb elevation (a tendency toward a decreased benefit was associated with middle-age, male sex, shorter duration of therapy, observed side-effects, and Met-Hb elevation)., Conclusions: Therapy is well tolerated and results in a good therapeutic benefit which lasts after termination of therapy. With adequate monitoring, the use of dapsone in patients with pressure urticaria has such a good risk-benefit ratio that we support early treatment initiation., (© The Authors • Journal compilation © Blackwell Verlag GmbH, Berlin.)