Search

There are certain demographic characteristics that may serve as risk factors for exposure to a contact allergen. Volatile alkyl nitrites, colloquially known as "poppers," are commonly inhaled by men who have sex with men (MSM) for their psychoactive and muscle-relaxing effects. They have been reported to cause either allergic contact Dermatitis® (ACD) or irritant contact Dermatitis® (ICD), termed "poppers Dermatitis®." We searched PubMed, Embase, and Web of Science to understand the patient population, clinical presentation, diagnosis, and clinical course of poppers Dermatitis®. Our search returned 13 articles detailing 18 patients total. Most patient cases were male ( n  = 13/15; 87%), of whom 5 were MSM. The reports on the remaining 8 men did not disclose their sexual behaviors. The chemicals deemed responsible for adverse cutaneous side effects included amyl nitrite (6/18; 33%), butyl nitrite (3/18; 167%), isobutyl nitrite (2/18; 11%), and an unspecified alkyl nitrite (7/18, 39%). The most common diagnosis was ICD (10/18; 56%). Only 3 patients underwent alkyl nitrite patch testing, with 2 testing positive for ACD. The most commonly involved anatomic sites were perinasal (13/18; 72%) and perioral regions (10/18; 56%). Rash morphology has been described as yellow crusting, impetigo-like, eczematous, vesicular, edematous, and erythematous. Ulceration can occur with direct skin contact to concentrated nitrite solution. Poppers Dermatitis® was often self-limited with complete resolution. Dermatologists should consider poppers Dermatitis® in those presenting with a characteristic midfacial rash, especially in MSM.

Background: Identification of athletic shoes for patients with contact allergy is difficult. Company reports of allergen content are often incorrect. Objectives: To determine whether chemical analysis of 4 athletic shoes, previously reported to be free of the most common contact allergens, contain quantifiable allergen levels. Methods: Samples from the uppers and insoles of 4 shoes believed to be free of common allergens were assessed by mass spectrometry. A total of 4 rubber accelerators and 2 adhesives were directly quantified and additional 7 rubber accelerators were assessed using semiquantitative measures. Results: Aside from carbamates (assayed as 59 ppm zinc in insoles) in SeaVee's Sixty-Six sneakers, para-tertiarybutylphenol formaldehyde resin (PTBFR) (assayed as 7.6 ppm paratertiary butylphenol or 4-tertiary butylphenol [4TBP] in uppers) in Allbirds Tree Runners and rosin (assayed as 628 ppm sodium abietate in uppers) and carbamates (24 ppm zinc in uppers) in Saucony Jazz sneakers, these shoes had low levels of all allergens assayed in this study. Tom's Carlo sneakers contained rosin (127 ppm sodium abietate in insoles), PTBFR (6.5 ppm 4TBP in uppers), and carbamates (112 ppm sodium abietate in insoles) but had low levels of all other assayed allergens. Conclusions: Although identifying allergen-free shoes is challenging, the results of this analysis will help patch testing physicians recommend athletic shoes to patients with specific allergies.

Objectives: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) patients face health issues relevant to dermatologists, such as allergic contact dermatitis (ACD); however, there is a lack of information surrounding common allergens causing ACD that disproportionally affect SGM patients. Methods: Covidence, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched to identify relevant articles studying ACD in the SGM population. Results: Common allergens associated with ACD in SGM patients include nitrates, fragrance mix, methylisothiazolinone, methylisothiazolinone-methylchloroisothiazolinone, topical antibiotics, and allergens seen in chest binders. Common anatomic sites included the chest, cheeks, perioral region, nasal orifices, and the anogenital region. Conclusions: Certain allergens and body sites affected by ACD are more common among the SGM community. This can help guide patch testing as a diagnostic tool. Further research must be conducted regarding ACD in SGM patients.

Background: Although allergic contact dermatitis is a type IV hypersensitivity reaction, type I hypersensitivity reactions, such as anaphylaxis, have been reported during patch testing. Objective: The aim of this study was to identify reported cases of anaphylaxis from patch testing and estimate its rate. Methods: A literature review was conducted on PubMed to identify previously reported cases of anaphylaxis after patch testing and suspected allergens. In addition, a survey was distributed to expert patch testing dermatologists to determine the rate of anaphylaxis after patch testing. Results: Three anaphylaxis cases due to patch testing were found in the literature. Twenty-seven of 36 expert patch testers completed the survey for a 75% response rate. These dermatologists have tested an estimated 201,720 patients in their combined careers. From them, 2 cases of patch test anaphylaxis were reported. The rate of anaphylaxis from patch testing was calculated to be 1 in 100,860 tests among our cohort. Conclusions: Patch testing induced anaphylaxis is rare and may be more likely in patients with a history of anaphylaxis. Although rare, dermatologists should have a management plan in place.

Competing Interests: The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to declare.

Objectives: Sexual and gender minority (SGM) patients face health issues relevant to dermatologists, such as allergic contact dermatitis (ACD); however, there is a lack of information surrounding common allergens causing ACD that disproportionally affect SGM patients., Methods: Covidence, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched to identify relevant articles studying ACD in the SGM population., Results: Common allergens associated with ACD in SGM patients include nitrates, fragrance mix, methylisothiazolinone, methylisothiazolinone-methylchloroisothiazolinone, topical antibiotics, and allergens seen in chest binders. Common anatomic sites included the chest, cheeks, perioral region, nasal orifices, and the anogenital region., Conclusions: Certain allergens and body sites affected by ACD are more common among the SGM community. This can help guide patch testing as a diagnostic tool. Further research must be conducted regarding ACD in SGM patients., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2022 American Contact Dermatitis Society. All Rights Reserved.)

Competing Interests: The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to declare.

Competing Interests: The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to declare.

Background: Although patch testing has historically been done by dermatologists, allergists are also patch testing. Little is known about the current utilization of patch testing by medical specialists., Objective: The aim was to determine trends in utilization of patch testing in Medicare beneficiaries by various clinicians and demographics., Methods: Data from the 2012-2017 Medicare Public Use File were analyzed, including 82,241 total unique clinicians of whom 312 filed a patch testing claim., Results: Dermatologists had a steady share of patch tests (annual clinicians; annual patches) from 2012 (158; 258,735) to 2017 (199; 351,994), an increase of 25.9% and 36.0%, respectively. Allergists, however, had a marked increase in utilization of patch tests from 2012 (84; 62,498) to 2017 (187; 182,480), an increase of 122.6% and 192.0%, respectively. In multivariable logistic regression models, male dermatologists and allergists had increased odds of patch testing (P < 0.001 for both), as did clinicians in the Northeast and Southern United States (P ≤ 0.003 for both)., Limitations: Data are only available for Medicare Part B patients; changes in utilization may be different for individuals, private insurance, or Medicare Advantage Plans., Conclusions: Relative to dermatologists, patch testing is increasing among allergists. Addressing barriers to patch testing may increase rates of patch testing by dermatologists., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2021 American Contact Dermatitis Society. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: Allergic contact dermatitis to tattoo ink may last from weeks to years. Formaldehyde is a strong sensitizer that may be present in predispersed tattoo inks., Objectives: The aim of this study was to evaluate the presence of formaldehyde in predispersed tattoo inks using the chromotropic acid method., Methods: Tattoo inks from 39 companies were evaluated. Inclusion criteria included availability to purchase inks online through US tattoo product wholesalers or individual Web sites. Brands were grouped based on prevalence of use: common, uncommon, or rare. For common brands, 8 colors (primary colors, secondary colors, black, and white) were purchased. For uncommon and rare brands, 5 colors (primary colors, black, and white) were purchased. Each ink was tested with standard chromotropic acid method procedures; concentration of formaldehyde released was quantified using spectrophotometry., Results: In total, 127 tattoo inks were purchased and tested. Ninety-three (73%) tested positive for formaldehyde release; 34 (27%) tested negative. Formaldehyde release did not correlate with color or brand. At least 1 ink from all brands (except 1) was positive for formaldehyde release., Conclusion: Approximately three-quarters of selected US tattoo inks tested positive for formaldehyde release. Clinicians should be aware of tattoo ink as a potential source of formaldehyde., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare., (Copyright © 2020 American Contact Dermatitis Society. All Rights Reserved.)

Background: Common recommendations for tattoo aftercare to ensure proper healing include application of topical products. Little is known about tattoo aftercare products., Methods: Tattoo aftercare products were identified from a previous study and a search on Amazon.com using the phrase "tattoo aftercare." Duplicates and products without complete ingredient lists were excluded. Marketing claims were tabulated. All ingredients were entered in Excel and grouped according to Contact Allergen Management Program categories. Comparison of ingredients to North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) screening and American Contact Dermatitis Society (ACDS) Core allergens was conducted., Results: A total of 84 tattoo aftercare products from 52 distinct brands were found. Forty-eight distinctive market claims were identified; the use of "natural ingredient(s)" (42.9%) was most common. There were 4 to 28 ingredients per product (mean = 11.8 ± 5.5) with a total of 369 distinct ingredients listed. Products contained an average of 7.9 ± 3.9 ACDS Core allergens per product and 7.0 ± 3.7 NACDG allergens per product. Most common allergens included fragrance/botanicals (n = 529), vitamin E derivatives (n = 43), and vitamin B5 derivatives (n = 11)., Conclusions: This review of 84 products found that tattoo aftercare products contain an average of 8 ACDS Core and 7 NACDG allergens. Clinicians should be aware of potential allergens in tattoo aftercare products., Competing Interests: The authors have no funding or conflicts of interest to declare. This material is the result of work supported with resources and the use of facilities at the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center. The contents do not represent the views of the US Department of Veterans Affairs or the US Government., (Copyright © 2020 American Contact Dermatitis Society. All Rights Reserved.)