Search

Epicutaneous patch testing is the diagnostic standard for the detection of allergic contact dermatitis. The present guidelines are aimed at residents and board-certified physicians in the fields of dermatology and allergology as well as other medical specialties involved in establishing the indication for patch testing and its execution in patients with contact dermatitis and other forms of delayed-type hypersensitivity. The target audience also includes other health care providers and insurance funds. Based on a systematic literature search and a formal consensus process (S3), the guidelines were developed by dermatologists in collaboration with pediatricians, occupational medicine physicians, nursing staff as well as patient representatives. The systematic methodological approach and appraisal of evidence upon which the recommendations are based are outlined in a separate method report that also contains evidence tables. The guidelines address general aspects of patch testing as well as medicolegal issues. The recommendations given relate to topics such as the indication for patch testing, informed patient consent, as well as the choice of test substances, test chambers and test site, duration of exposure, reading times and interpretation of test reactions. Furthermore, recommendations are provided with respect to endogenous and exogenous factors, specific patient groups (children, pregnant women, immunosuppressed individuals) as well as possible risks and adverse events associated with patch testing using contact allergens., (© 2019 The Authors | Journal compilation © Blackwell Verlag GmbH, Berlin.)

Epicutaneous patch testing is the diagnostic standard for the detection of allergic contact dermatitis. The present guidelines are aimed at residents and board-certified physicians in the fields of dermatology and allergology as well as other medical specialties involved in establishing the indication for patch testing and its execution in patients with contact dermatitis and other forms of delayed-type hypersensitivity. The target audience also includes other health care providers and insurance funds. Based on a systematic literature search and a formal consensus process (S3), the guidelines were developed by dermatologists in collaboration with pediatricians, occupational medicine physicians, nursing staff as well as patient representatives. The systematic methodological approach and appraisal of evidence upon which the recommendations are based are outlined in a separate method report that also contains evidence tables. The guidelines address general aspects of patch testing as well as medicolegal issues. The recommendations given relate to topics such as the indication for patch testing, informed patient consent, as well as the choice of test substances, test chambers and test site, duration of exposure, reading times and interpretation of test reactions. Furthermore, recommendations are provided with respect to endogenous and exogenous factors, specific patient groups (children, pregnant women, immunosuppressed individuals) as well as possible risks and adverse events associated with patch testing using contact allergens. Note: This publication is part 1 of the short version of the S3 guidelines for "Epicutaneous patch testing using contact allergens and drugs" (registry no. 013 - 018; date: March 20, 2019; valid until December 31, 2021). Part 2 of the short version will be published in the next issue. The long version of these guidelines can be accessed at www.awmf.org. The method report is available as online publication (https://www.awmf.org/leitlinien/detail/ll/013-018.html) and contains the evidence tables in its appendix., (© 2019 The Authors | Journal compilation © Blackwell Verlag GmbH, Berlin.)

Lesions of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), irritant contact dermatitis (ICD), and atopic dermatitis (AD) share similar clinical features and thus, their diagnosis can be challenging. The aim of this study was to reassess histopathology and immunophenotyping properties to distinguish between ACD, ICD, and AD. Charts of patients with eczema, who had undergone complete routine diagnostic workup (skin biopsies, patch tests, skin prick tests, and respectively or serum IgE levels), were reviewed. Thirty-five skin biopsy specimens of 28 patients (mean age 64 ± 15 years; ♀ = 13 ♂ = 15) with clear diagnosis of ACD (n = 15), ICD (n = 6), or AD (n = 14) were analyzed. Histomorphological and immunohistochemical (CD3, CD4, CD8, CD11c, CD34, CD123, S100, and IL-17) parameters were evaluated using Kruskal-Wallis test, Wilcoxon test, Fisher exact test, and decision tree analysis. Eosinophils were statistically significant (P = 0.0184), more often observed in AD than in ACD or ICD. No other statistically significant differences were found with regard to epidermal patterns, patterns of dermal infiltrates, or immunophenotyping. Using predictive modeling approaches, dermal eosinophils were found to be associated with AD, necrotic epidermal keratinocytes with ICD, and a focal type of parakeratosis with ACD. As an additional finding, pseudo-Pautrier microabscesses, which were present in the skin of 2 AD and 2 ACD patients, contained myeloid dendritic cells (CD11c). Differentiation of ACD, ICD, and AD should be based on clinical features and results of allergy tests. Histopathology does not reliably differentiate between ACD, ICD, and AD, but helps to exclude psoriasis, tinea, or T-cell lymphoma.

Background: Hereditary factors may influence individual susceptibility to contact allergy., Objectives: To investigate genetic variants with impacts on early inflammatory reactions and T cell functions that possibly increase the risk of contact allergy., Patients and Methods: Three hundred and seventy two patients undergoing patch testing were recruited from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK). Of these, 133 were monosensitized and 239 were polysensitized, defined as reacting to three or more unrelated sensitizers. Within the polysensitized individuals, a subgroup with at least one particularly strong patch test reaction (strong reactors; n = 194) was considered. Three hundred and forty-seven blood bank donors served as controls. Fifteen genetic variants in 13 genes were analysed., Results: The homozygous variant CXCL11 AA genotype (rs6817952) was significantly more frequent among polysensitized patients (10 of 239 = 4.2%; p = 0.0048; odds ratio 7.49; 95%CI: 1.7-36.1) than among monosensitized patients (2.2%) and in the control group (0.6%). None of the remaining genetic variants investigated were characterized by similarly strong associations. However, the significance was lost after correction for multiple comparisons., Conclusions: The homozygous variant CXCL11 genotype is associated with an increased risk of contact allergy. To confirm this exploratory finding, further independent studies are needed., (© 2016 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Airborne contact dermatitis (AirbCD) is not uncommon, according to a large number of published case reports and review articles. Epidemiological data on AirbCD based on larger clinical samples have not yet been published., Objectives: To investigate demographic characteristics and patch test reactivity in patients diagnosed with both occupational and non-occupational AirbCD., Methods: A retrospective analysis of data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), 1994-2013, including 201 344 consecutively patch tested patients, was performed., Results: One thousand two hundred and three patients (0.6%) were diagnosed with AirbCD, 421 (35.0%) of these with an occupational background. Occupational dermatitis and face involvement were more prevalent than in patients without AirbCD (n = 200 141). Sensitization to epoxy resin and sensitization to methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/methylisothiazolinone (MI) were significantly associated with AirbCD, and there was a trend for sensitization to Compositae mix and/or sesquiterpene lactone mix to be associated with AirbCD. Adhesives, plastics, construction materials, paints and varnishes in occupational cases, and plants in non-occupational cases, were the most commonly documented culprit product categories., Conclusions: AirbCD is more common in patients with occupational dermatitis than in patients with non-occupational dermatitis. In our clinical sample, components of epoxy resin systems, MCI/MI and Compositae allergens were the most important contact allergens associated with AirbCD. Patch testing with additional allergens is important., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Aluminium tubes for pharmaceutical use are internally lacquered with epoxy resins (ER) based on bisphenol A diglycidyl ether (BADGE). Recently, it was shown that remnants of ER polymerization like BADGE are extractable from epoxy-based coatings of commercially available tubes and may leach into semi-solid drug preparations. We aimed to evaluate the safety of BADGE-contaminated macrogol ointments in individuals sensitized to ER based on BADGE by use tests., Methods: Repeated open application testing (ROAT) in 11 patients sensitized to ER based on BADGE with BADGE in macrogol ointments (3 mg/kg; 30 mg/kg, equivalent to BADGE concentration determined in macrogol ointment after storage in a commercially available tube; 300 mg/kg)., Results: The 30 mg/kg BADGE ointment elicited reactions in three patients, and another three patients reacted to 300 mg/kg BADGE ointment. No reactions to the vehicle control and 3 mg/kg BADGE were observed., Conclusions: Elevated BADGE concentrations in ER-coated aluminium tubes pose a risk of developing contact dermatitis to patients sensitized to ER based on BADGE. Quality standards are deemed necessary for the production of ER-coated aluminium tubes intended for pharmaceutical use and should consider the results of the present ROAT study., (© 2014 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

A 52-year-old geriatric nurse presented with recurrent eczema localized in uncovered skin areas. Patch testing produced an eczematous skin reaction with type IV sensitization totetrazepam. A relapse of contact dermatitis was successfully prevented by using occupational skin protection measures and organizational measures.Our case indicates that a sensitization to drugs should be considered when allergic contact dermatitisis suspected in nursing personnel.