Search

Background: Benzyl alcohol is a widely used preservative, solvent and fragrance material. According to published data, it is a rare sensitizer in humans. Objectives: To identify characteristics and sensitization patterns of patients with positive patch test reactions to benzyl alcohol and to check the reliability of the patch test preparation benzyl alcohol 1% pet. Patients and Methods: Retrospective analysis of data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 2010–2019. Results: Of 70 867 patients patch tested with benzyl alcohol 1% pet., 146 (0.21%) showed a positive reaction, most of them (89%) only weakly positive. The number of doubtful and irritant reactions significantly exceeded the number of positive reactions. Reproducibility of positive test reactions was low. Among benzyl alcohol‐positive patients, compared to benzyl alcohol‐negative patients, there were significantly more patients with leg dermatitis (17.8% vs. 8.6%), more patients aged 40 years or more (81.5% vs. 70.5%) and more patients who were tested because of a suspected intolerance reaction to topical medications (34.9% vs. 16.6%). Concomitant positive reactions were mainly seen to fragrances, preservatives and ointment bases. Conclusions: Sensitization to benzyl alcohol occurs very rarely, mainly in patients with stasis dermatitis. In view of our results, benzyl alcohol cannot be regarded as a significant contact allergen, and therefore marking it as skin sensitizer 1B and labelling it with H 317 is not helpful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Information on the incidence of OPM-related symptoms in exposed individuals is extremely difficult to obtain, because no central database exists, and no reporting or notification is legally required. 1c).4 Conjunctivitis, airway symptoms and, rarely, systemic symptoms such as fever, malaise and severe anaphylactic symptoms have been reported. Although the symptoms are likely caused by the setae, the pathophysiology is by no means clear.8 Three mechanisms, which are not mutually exclusive, have been discussed: (i) foreign body reaction, (ii) toxic/pseudoallergic reaction based on thaumetopoein, a histamine liberator protein8,9 and (iii) IgE-mediated allergy. [Extracted from the article]

Background: The diagnostic significance of the atopy patch test for the management of dermatitis possibly triggered by aeroallergens is still controversial. However, sufficiently large studies with routinely tested standardized aeroallergen patch test preparations in dermatitis patients are lacking. Objective: To evaluate the reaction frequency and the reaction profiles of 10 until mid‐2015 commercially available, standardized aeroallergen patch test preparations of the 'Stallerpatch' test series (Stallergenes, Antony Cedex, France) in a large multicentre patient cohort. Methods: A retrospective data analysis of patients with suspected aeroallergen‐dependent eczematous skin lesions was performed, who were patch tested in 15 Information Network of Departments of Dermatology‐associated clinics between 2000 and 2015. Patients were stratified according to their atopic dermatitis (AD) status. Results: The study group included 3676 patients (median age 41 years, 34.8% males, 54.5% AD). The most common aeroallergens causing positive patch test reactions were Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus (19.6%), Dermatophagoides farinae (16.9%), birch (6.2%), timothy grass (6.0%), cat dander (5.4%), mugwort (4.9%) and dog dander (4.6%). Reactions to other pollen allergen preparations, that is 5 grasses (3.2%), cocksfoot (2.1%) and plantain (1.6%), were less common. Positive patch test reactions to aeroallergens were consistently more frequent in patients with AD. These patients showed proportionally less dubious, follicular, irritant and weak positive reactions. Independent of AD status, a patient history of past or present allergic rhinitis was associated with an increased chance of a positive aeroallergen patch test reaction to pollen allergens. Conclusion: The aeroallergen patch test is a useful add‐on tool in clinical routine, especially in patients with AD and/or respiratory allergy. A patch test series comprising Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus, Dermatophagoides farinae, birch, timothy grass, cat dander and mugwort seems to be suitable. Controlled studies with specific provocation and elimination procedures are required to further evaluate the diagnostic significance of the proposed screening series. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Metalworkers occupationally exposed to metals, tools, metalworking fluids (MWFs), technical oils, gloves, skin care products etc. frequently suffer from occupational dermatitis (OD). Objectives: To investigate occupational exposure and to identify relevant occupational sensitizers in metalworkers with OD, and to evaluate suitability of current German patch test recommendations for this occupational group. Patients and methods: As part of the OCCUDERM project, occupational exposure of 230 metalworkers with suspected OD patch tested in the departments of dermatology in Göttingen and Osnabrück (both Lower Saxony, Germany) in 2012–2017 was recorded by questionnaire. These data, as well as results, of patch testing with standardized allergens and with workplace material were analysed. Results: Metalworking fluids and skin care products were the most important exposures. Among MWF allergens, most frequently sensitizations to formaldehyde and formaldehyde releasers, colophony/abietic acid and monoethanolamine were observed. Sensitization to methylisothiazolinone (MI) was frequent, probably as part of the general European epidemic of contact allergy to MI in leave‐on cosmetics. Sensitization to glove ingredients only played a minor role. Conclusions: The known occupational allergen spectrum could largely be confirmed. In order not to miss relevant sensitizations, patch testing with material from the patients' workplaces in parallel to baseline and MWF series is recommended. Sensitizations diagnosed could not always be linked to particular occupational exposures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article presents a study of Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) data on methyldibromo glutaronitrile (MDBGN) according to the methods of the IVDK between 2010 and 2017. Frequencies of sensitization to MDBGN lessened just slightly, but had remained at around 2% in spite the ban between 2010 and 2015. The number of negatives of repeated open application (ROAT) but patch test positives dramatically increases with the patch test concentration.