Search

Background: Massage therapists are particularly exposed to constituents of massage preparations, wet work and mechanical strain and therefore, at high risk to develop occupational dermatitis (OD)., Objectives: To describe the sensitization spectrum of massage therapists with OD., Patients and Methods: In a retrospective study, patch test data of patients with OD (128 massage therapists and 24 374 patients working in other professions) collected by the Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK, 2008-2020) were analysed., Results: Hand dermatitis (91.4%) and allergic contact dermatitis (34.4%) were common in massage therapists with OD. Most frequent were sensitizations to fragrances/essential oils which were found in 54 (42.2%) massage therapists and thus, more often than in other patients with OD. Concomitant positivity to several fragrances/essential oils was frequent. In 8 (14.8%) of the 54 massage therapists, sensitizations to fragrances/essential oils were not detected with the baseline series, but only with special fragrance series., Conclusions: Allergic contact dermatitis is common in massage therapists with OD and is mainly caused by fragrances and essential oils. Hence, massage therapists should be aware of this risk. When OD is suspected, not only the baseline series, but also special fragrance series should be patch tested in this occupational group., (© 2022 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Changing patterns of exposure lead to changes in the spectrum of contact allergy in the general population and in patients patch tested for suspected contact allergy. The main contact allergens (haptens) are assembled in the so-called 'baseline series'., Objectives: To present the current spectrum of contact allergy to baseline series allergens, and its temporal development over the last 12 years, based on data collected by the 56 active departments of the trinational Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK)., Methods: Patch-test data, along with core demographic and clinical information, subdivided into 4-year periods for all patients patch tested with the baseline series in the IVDK, were analysed descriptively. Moreover, log-binomial regression analysis addressed temporal trends of specific contact allergies, adjusted for potentially confounding factors., Results: Among the 125 436 patients tested with the German baseline series, the most common allergens were nickel (14·7%), fragrance mix I (8·1%), Myroxylon pereirae resin (7·5%) and cobalt (5·2%), with no conclusive trend. The rise and fall of contact allergy to methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MI), following (self-) regulation in the European Union, reflected the MI contact allergy epidemic. Propolis showed a marked upward trend with a prevalence of 3·94% during the period 2015-2018., Conclusions: Decreases in sensitization prevalence likely reflect reduced exposure, with some lag, as seen with hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde. If no (sufficient) decrease can be observed despite interventions, such as for nickel and chromium, affected subgroups should be identified and their causative exposures explored. Finally, increases such as that observed with propolis, certainly warrant targeted investigation of the exposures driving sensitization, and possibly intervention. What is already known about this topic? Contact allergy is prevalent in the general population. Surveillance based on clinical data offers timely information on trends concerning certain allergens or subgroups at risk. What does this study add? This analysis provides an update of the current contact allergy prevalence in Central Europe, including time trends. This study describes the demographic and clinical profile of patients tested from 2007 to 2018. This research identifies contact allergens that require (further) preventive efforts. Linked Comment: Schuttelaar. Br J Dermatol 2020; 183:800-801., (© 2020 The Authors. British Journal of Dermatology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of British Association of Dermatologists.)

Intolerance reactions to metal implants may be caused by metal allergy. However, prior to implantation, 'prophetic'/prophylactic patch testing should not be performed. Pre-implant patch testing should only be done to verify or exclude metal allergy in patients with a corresponding history. In case of implant-related complications - in particular following replacement arthroplasty - such as pain, effusion, skin lesions, reduced range of motion or implant loosening, orthopedic causes should be ruled out first. Workup of suspected metal implant allergy should then be done using the DKG standard series, which includes nickel, cobalt, and chromium preparations. Various studies assessing the usefulness of metal alloy discs for patch testing have shown this particular approach to be ineffective with respect to providing reliable information on metal allergy. Any positive reaction in such tests cannot be assigned to a specific metal contained within the alloy. Furthermore, there is a risk of broad and indiscriminate use of these readily available discs. Accordingly, given the lack of additional benefit compared to patch testing with standardized metal salt preparations, we do not recommend patch testing with metal alloy discs., (© 2015 Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft (DDG). Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

In clinical practice occupational skin diseases usually present as hand dermatitis. Occupationally acquired contact allergies are of eminent relevance in many work place products e.g. skin care products, dyes and paints, epoxy resins or protective gloves. However, not infrequently, a range of other dermatoses of different etiology and localization can be occupationally induced and, at least in Germany, thus be medically treated and--if necessary--compensated for with full coverage by the statutory employers' liability insurance. Examples regarding non-eczematous skin diseases triggered by external factors are psoriatic lesions, cutaneous type-1-allergies, occupationally acquired infections, and dermatoses in other localizations which are occupationally exposed to irritant influences (e.g. feet in workers wearing occlusive safety boots). Moreover, outdoor workers deserve specific attention by the dermatologist if squamous cell carcinomas including precursor lesions like actinic keratoses or Bowen disease have occurred. In Germany, recently the scientific advisory committee to the Ministry of Labor has recommended including these skin cancers caused by occupational solar UV exposure in the national list of occupational diseases. The framework for dermatological preventive care of occupationally-induced inflammatory dermatoses has been continuously improved in the last years. The aim is to reach a similar level of care and preventive measures for patients with occupational skin cancer, including primary preventive workers' education.

Background and Objectives: The relevance of contact allergens is subject to constant change due to changing exposures according to consumers' preferences and legal requirements. The objective of this paper is to present trends in contact sensitization from the DKG and IVDK patch test clinics, which have led to changes in the DKG standard series (as of 1.1.2014), as well as the current legal framework which has influenced these trends and the way patch testing is performed., Patients and Methods: The patients from 56 DKG and IVDK patch test clinics from 2010 (n = 13,117), 2011 (n = 13,320) and 2012 (n = 12,529) were analyzed with regard to frequencies of sensitization (hit list) to contact allergens as well as the location of allergic contact dermatitis., Results: With a sensitization rate of 15 % nickel is still the most frequently recognized contact allergen. An increase can be observed for fragrance mix I (9.1 %), the preservative composition of methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI) (4.5 %) and methylisothiazolinone (MI) alone (6.8 %). A decline is present for potassium dichromate from above 6 % (2007) to 3 % (2012) and for bufexamac (currently at 0.6 %). Backgrounds, legal requirements and resulting changes to the DKG standard series are illustrated., Conclusions: The indicated trends demonstrate the relevance of clinical epidemiology and the "sentinel function" of DKG and IVDK with regard to public health and prevention of contact allergies., (© 2014 Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft (DDG). Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

A broad spectrum of various substances may cause occupational allergic contact dermatitis. Often, it is difficult to identify potentially or truly relevant allergens at the workplace. Therefore, the consulting physician must have a comprehensive knowledge of possible allergens in different occupations to perform specific diagnostics and to initiate efficient secondary prevention by allergen avoidance. In this review, we give some practically relevant general comments on patch testing in occupational dermatitis, followed by a discussion of important occupational allergens in those occupational groups most frequently affected by occupational dermatitis. Finally, recommendations on which allergens should be tested in the respective occupational groups are given or reported from the literature.

Background Ingredients of leave-on cosmetics and body care products may sensitize. However, not every case of cosmetic intolerance is due to contact sensitization. Objective To describe the frequency of contact sensitization due to cosmetics in a large clinic population, and a possible particular allergen pattern. Methods Retrospective analysis of data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology, 2006-2011. Results Of 69 487 patients tested, 'cosmetics, creams, sunscreens' was the only suspected allergen source category in 10 124 patients (14.6%). A final diagnosis 'allergic contact dermatitis' was stated in 2658 of these patients (26.3%).Compared to a control group, there were significantly more reactions to fragrance mixes I and II, balsam of Peru, methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone ( MCI/ MI) and lanolin alcohols. No special pattern of fragrance sensitization could be identified. Among the preservatives, MI was by far the leading allergen, while sensitization to other widely used compounds like parabens or phenoxyethanol was rare. Conclusions True allergic reactions to cosmetic ingredients are rarer than generally assumed. Limitation of exposure to MI in leave-on cosmetics and body care products is urgently needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Contact allergy ( CA) surveillance networks provide information to a multitude of stakeholders, which is indispensable for evidence-based decision-making in the field of prevention. Methods and results of the German surveillance system on CA are reviewed and discussed with reference to other systems. The German network structure comprises 56 departments of dermatology and includes all patients who are patch-tested for suspected CA. Data analysis considers the results of patch testing and further pertinent information for each patient. Following aspects are addressed: (i) the description of the clinical population, (ii) evaluation of patch test reactions, (iii) relationship between patch test results and population characteristics. Trend analyses on chromate (decreasing), epoxy resin (increasing) and nickel (heterogeneous) served as examples for surveillance system analyses, with the identification of sentinel events, as well as proof of success or failure of prevention. In addition, external data sources can be used such as sales data of patch test preparations to estimate frequencies of sensitization on a population level. National prescription data of drugs and statistics of labelling of preservatives on cosmetics can be included, the latter two approaches allowing for risk estimates conferred by specific allergens. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Preservatives are well-known and important contact allergens. To examine the frequency of sensitization to preservatives, including time trends. Retrospective analysis of data on patch testing of preservatives contained in the standard series and special series collected by the IVDK during 1996-2009. Some 120 000 and 80 000 patients were tested with the baseline and the preservative series, respectively. Sensitization frequencies of the standard series allergens all ranged above 1%: methyldibromoglutaronitrile (MDBGN) 2·36-4·5%, methyl(chloro)isothiazolinone (MCI/MI) 2·22%, formaldehyde 1·54%, paraben mix 1·33% and Bronopol 1·25%. Regarding the special preservative series, 1·54% reacted positive to methylisothiazolinone (MI), and < 1% to the other preservatives. Concomitant reactions to formaldehyde in formaldehyde releasers ranged from 15% to almost 50%, and 67% of MI positives reacted to MCI/MI. As indicated by the MOAHLFA index, sensitization to MI, iodopropynylbutyl carbamate (IPBC) and quaternium 15 was associated more often with occupational dermatitis, whereas sensitization to imidazolidinyl urea and diazolidinyl urea was associated with face dermatitis, indicating cosmetic exposure. Epidemiologically relevant decreases (> 10%) were seen in chloroacetamide, benzyl alcohol and MDBGN. Epidemiologically relevant increases were noted in IPBC, sodium benzoate and MI. Preservatives are still important contact allergens. The introduction of new preservatives should consider the specific characteristics of occupational and of nonoccupational (cosmetic, household) exposure, and preventive measures should aim equally at both areas. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research indicates that positive patch tests to nickel (II) sulphate, cobalt (II) chloride and potassium dichromate commonly occur together.To further examine the relationship between nickel, cobalt, chromate, and the factors that may potentially be related to concurrent sensitizations to two or all three metal allergens, data from the Information Network of Dermatology Departments (IVDK,) have been investigated.Women had a higher conditional odds of concurrent nickel–cobalt (OR = 6.80; 95% CI: 5.65–8.19) and nickel–chromate (OR = 2.13; 95% CI: 1.67–2.72) reactions than men. Construction workers had a significantly higher odds of cobalt–chromate reactions (OR = 13.89; 95% CI: 10.36–18.64), while the odds of isolated cobalt allergy was only 0.92 (95% CI: 0.48–1.74). Patients with underlying atopic eczema/dermatitis syndrome had a 40–90% higher chance of any positive outcome, which involved chromate. Polysensitization, defined as the number of positive reactions to standard series substances other than nickel, cobalt, and chromate, was also significantly associated with the concurrent reactions; moreover, steady and significant effect gradients were noted.This research confirms the occupational nature of cobalt–chromate concurrent reactions, in particular, in construction workers. Polysensitization, which is considered to represent susceptibility to delayed-hypersensitivity in general, is also associated with the concurrent reactions to the metals. Hence, not only coupled exposure, but also individual susceptibility may be responsible for concurrent reactions to metals in man. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Periorbital dermatitis is common and can be due to the external use of ophthalmic drugs. We evaluated patch test results of the Information Network of the Departments of Dermatology. During a 5-year period (1995–99), of a total 49 256 patch-tested patients, 1053 (2.1%) were eventually diagnosed as allergic periorbital contact dermatitis (APD) and 588 (1.2%) as non-allergic periorbital dermatitis (NAPD). Patient characteristics between APD, NAPD and other cases (OCs) differed with respect to sex (19.7% male in both periorbital groups versus 36.3% in OCs), atopic dermatitis (10.4% in APD versus 60.2% in NAPD versus 16.9% in OCs) and age, APD being substantially more often (68.2%) aged 40 and above than NAPD (52.6%). Several of the top allergens in OCs [such as fragrance mix, Myroxylon pereirae resin (balsam of Peru), lanolin alcohol and potassium dichromate] caused significantly fewer positive test reactions in both periorbital groups. In contrast, thimerosal, phenylmercuric acetate, sodium disulfite, gentamicin sulfate, phenylephrine hydrochloride and benzalkonium chloride tested positively significantly more often in APD but not in NAPD, verifying them as true ophthalmic allergens. Finally, in 42 cases (4%) of APD patients, additional allergens were identified by testing of the patients' own substances (mostly β-blockers, oxybuprocaine and dexpanthenol), supporting the necessity of testing with ophthalmic drugs as is where individual substances are not readily available. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]