Search

Background: Mentha piperita (MP; peppermint) oil has many commercial uses. Objective: To characterize the epidemiology of contact allergy to MP oil 2% petrolatum. Methods: Retrospective analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data (2009-2020). Results: Of 28,128 patients tested to MP, 161 (0.6%) had an allergic reaction. Most allergic patients were female (77.0%) and/or over 40 years of age (71.4%). The most common anatomical sites of dermatitis included face (31.7%; of these, one-third specified lips), hands (17.4%), and scattered/generalized (18.6%). Nearly one-third (30.4%) of reactions were strong (++)/extreme (+++), and 80.1% were considered currently relevant. Common sources included oral hygiene preparations, foods, and lip products. Co-reaction with at least 1 of the other 19 fragrance/plant-related screening test preparations occurred in 82.6% (133/161) of MP-allergic patients, most commonly Cananga odorata oil (42.9%), fragrance mix I (41.0%), hydroperoxides of linalool (35.7%), Compositae mix (35.4%), Jasminum officinale oil (31.9%), Myroxylon pereirae (31.7%), and propolis (28.1%). Co-reaction with at least 1 of the 3 most commonly used fragrance screening allergens (fragrance mix I, fragrance mix II, and/or Myroxylon pereirae ) was 59.6%. Conclusions: Twelve-year prevalence of MP allergy was 0.6%. Approximately 40% of cases would have been missed if only fragrance screening allergens were tested.

Allergic contact dermatitis is associated with significant disease and economic burden in the United States. To properly manage allergic contact dermatitis, it is important to accurately identify the substance(s) implicated in the dermatitis to prevent disease recurrence. The commercially available T.R.U.E Test (36 allergens) screening panel has been reported to have a conservative hypothetical allergen detection rate of 66.0%, at most. Importantly, these calculations are based on the 78% of patients who had clinically relevant reactions to allergens present on the North American Contact Dermatitis Group screening series (70 allergens), without the use of supplemental allergens. Testing with supplemental allergens beyond a screening series can more fully evaluate an individual's environmental and occupational exposure, which may significantly increase diagnostic accuracy. Comprehensive patch testing with additional allergens in sunscreens, cosmetics, and fragrances, for example, may increase the diagnostic yield as well as the likelihood of achieving a cure if the dermatitis is chronic and recalcitrant.

Background: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) remains a significant burden of disease in the United States. Patch testing is the criterion standard for diagnosing ACD, but its use may be limited by reimbursement challenges., Objective: This study aimed to assess the current rate of patch test utilization among dermatologists in academic, group, or private practice settings to understand different patch testing business models that address these reimbursement challenges., Methods: All members of the American Contact Dermatitis Society received an online survey regarding their experiences with patch testing and reimbursement., Results: A "yes" response was received from 28% of survey participants to the question, "Are you or have you been less inclined to administer patch tests or see patients needing patch tests due to challenges with receiving compensation for patch testing?" The most commonly reported barriers include inadequate insurance reimbursement and lack of departmental support., Conclusions: Compensation challenges to patch testing limit patient access to appropriate diagnosis and management of ACD. This can be addressed through a variety of innovative business models, including raising patch testing caps, negotiating relative value unit compensation, using a fixed salary model with directorship support from the hospital, and raising the percentages of collection reimbursement for physicians.

The American Contact Dermatitis Society Core Allergen Series was introduced in 2012. After 4 years of use, changes in our recommended allergens are necessary. For the updated series, we have reordered the first 4 panels to approximately mirror the current TRUE Test and removed parthenolide, triclosan, glutaraldehyde, and jasmine. Polymyxin B, lavender, sodium benzoate, ethylhexylglycerin, and benzoic acid are new additions to the American Contact Dermatitis Society series.

The American Contact Dermatitis Society recognizes the interest in the evaluation and management of metal hypersensitivity reactions. Given the paucity of robust evidence with which to guide our practices, we provide reasonable evidence and expert opinion-based guidelines for clinicians with regard to metal hypersensitivity reaction testing and patient management. Routine preoperative evaluation in individuals with no history of adverse cutaneous reactions to metals or history of previous implant-related adverse events is not necessary. Patients with a clear self-reported history of metal reactions should be evaluated by patch testing before device implant. Patch testing is only 1 element in the assessment of causation in those with postimplantation morbidity. Metal exposure from the implanted device can cause sensitization, but a positive metal test does not prove symptom causality. The decision to replace an implanted device must include an assessment of all clinical factors and a thorough risk-benefit analysis by the treating physician(s) and patient.

Allergic contact dermatitis is a common condition in dermatology. Patch testing is the criterion standard for diagnosis. However, dermatitis is not always caused by an allergen, and patch testing does not identify a culprit in every patient. Generalized dermatitis, defined as eczematous dermatitis affecting greater than 3 body sites, is often encountered in dermatology practice, especially patch test referral centers. Management for patients with generalized dermatitis who are patch test negative is challenging. The purpose of this article is to outline an approach to this challenging scenario and summarize the paucity of existing literature on patch test negative generalized dermatitis.

Evidence for the effectiveness of patch testing and the need for an expanded series that provides experience and evidence-based suggestions for an extended patch testing series are examined in this review. Many of those testing with shorter allergen series are interested in expanding the spectrum of patch testing. The American Contact Dermatitis Society (ACDS) Core Allergen Series Group has arranged a group of suggested allergen groups that can be logically scaled up or down depending on the needs of the patch tester and the community being tested. This is not an "ACDS 80 Standard." We suggest a core group of allergens similar to the TRUE Test (SmartPractice, Phoenix, Ariz) with subsequent trays providing a greater breadth of coverage in a logical fashion, with more likely allergens being higher in the tray. For more extensive testing, specialty trays (ie, cosmetics, metals, plant, etc) are recommended.

Background: The state of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) education has not been formally examined since the original study done by High and Cruz (Am J Contact Dermat. 2003;14(4):195-199)., Objective: The objectives of the study were to characterize the current state of ACD and patch-testing education in US dermatology residency programs and to determine if there has been any significant improvement over the past 8 years., Method: This was a survey of ACD education and patch-testing practices in US dermatology residency programs., Results: Surveys were sent to program directors and chief residents at all 112 US dermatology residency programs. Of the 224 surveys sent out, 105 (46.88%) were returned. There were several statistically significant changes from the 2002 survey. More faculty members who are designated as ACD experts are now members of the American Contact Dermatitis Society. Fewer programs now routinely review contact dermatitis-specific journals. Residents are now more likely to receive didactic lectures on ACD. Program directors estimated graduating residents will now be less likely to perform the TRUE Test in practice, and although not statistically significant, program directors also estimated an increase in the number of residents who will use expanded tests., Conclusions: Although some areas of ACD education have improved over the past 8 years, opportunities to further improve remain.

The house dust mite long has been studied for its potential role in atopic dermatitis. Its part in the pathogenesis of asthma and allergic rhinitis has been studied and is accepted. Testing for the dust mite allergen in this arena is performed with radioallergosorbent tests (RASTs) and prick testing. For several reasons, including the lack of a standardized testing tool, the difficulty in removing dust from the environment and the lack of association of dust and skin disease by patients, the role of the house dust mite in the pathogenesis of atopic dermatitis and skin disease has been questioned. Chemotechnique Diagnostics (Malmo, Sweden) now provides a standardized dust mite allergen in petrolatum in 2 concentrations. Dermatophagoides mix is a 50:50 mix of Dermatophagoides pteronyssinus and D. farinae at concentrations of 20% and 30%. The availability of a standardized patch test allergen for the house dust mite provides a better tool to investigate the role of this allergen as a contactant., (Copyright 2001 by W.B. Saunders Company.)

Allergic contact dermatitis to Primula obconica has long been established. It is considered a significant allergen in Europe and has been included in standard screening there. The allergen is much less common in the United States. The frequency of allergy to P obconica in the United States is difficult to assess because no series of routine testing to this allergen has been reported. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the frequency of primin allergy in routine testing in a referral patch test center. A series of 567 consecutive patch tests was performed that included primin as part of the standard screening. Only one patient had a positive reaction. Although it is frequently missed and often difficult to diagnose, the frequency of primin allergy in this series was too low to indicate including this allergen as part of routine testing.