Search

4 workers developed hand dermatitis in an automated starch modification process plant, 2,3-epoxypropyl trimethyl ammonium chloride (EPTMAC), a quaternary ammonium compound used as a cationizing chemical, produced allergic reactions an all 4 patients, They had only been in contact with EPTMAC for a short time before developing dermatitis, which indicates that EPTMAC is a strong sensitizer. Immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy showed the feature of an allergic patch test. An industrial hygiene project was initiated at the factory to prevent new cases. It revealed many risks of skin contact with the process chemicals. Thus an automated process does not guarantee protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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.

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.

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.

This article focuses on various allergic reactions induced by carbonless copy paper. Carbonless copy paper was introduced in the 1950s to replace the need for carbon paper. The top paper is coated on the undersurface with a suspension of microcapsules containing a colorless dye. The receiving paper is coated on the front surface with a color-developing material. When pressure is applied to the top sheet, the microcapsules are broken, allowing the colorless dye to react chemically with the color-developing material on the bottom sheet. Two types of reactions have been reported from this material. One reaction is allergic contact dermatitis to the chemical color former, paratoluene sulfinate of Michler's hydrol.