Search

Regularly updating the prevalence of fragrance contact allergy (CA) is important. Patch testing with fragrance markers in the baseline series and the ingredients of fragrance mixes (FMs) is still debated.To update the prevalence and clinical characteristics of patients with fragrance CA. To establish the results of patch testing with individual allergens of FMs.A retrospective analysis of 3539 patients with dermatitis who were patch tested with the baseline series and FMs ingredients during 2016 to 2020 was performed.The prevalence of fragrance CA was 13%. About 10% of these patients with fragrance CA would be missed if the individual ingredients were not tested. Unlike hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde, there was no decreasing trend of CA to Evernia prunastri (oakmoss) extract after the EU regulation came into force. Patients with CA from only one ingredient of the mixes or having a weak positive reaction to the ingredients were significantly missed when tested with only the fragrance markers in the baseline series.Patch testing with individual fragrance allergens is crucial for experts to expand knowledge in the fragrance CA field. The concentrations of the allergens in FMs may need to be adjusted to detect patients with fragrance CA, since some were significantly overlooked.

Five workers from a plant manufacturing concrete wall panels and beams were referred to our department because of suspected occupational dermatitis. When patch tested, 3 workers reacted to potassium dichromate. Four workers reacted to ethylenediamine dihydrochloride, without any obvious exposure. Owing to the high proportion of workers with recent-onset skin disease, an investigation of all workers at the plant was initiated.To investigate the prevalence of occupational dermatitis and contact allergy in the workers at the plant.All 24 workers at the plant underwent a clinical investigation and were patch tested.Four cases of allergic occupational contact dermatitis and 3 cases of irritant occupational contact dermatitis were diagnosed. Contact allergy to potassium dichromate was found in 4 workers. All 4 also reacted to ethylenediamine dihydrochloride and/or amines that were present as additives in the cement.Chromate contact allergy can still be found in concrete workers, despite the legislation regulating the amount of hexavalent chromium (chromate) in cement. Occupational contact allergy to amines can be found in workers exposed to cement and concrete, so amines should be tested in these workers.

Contact allergies to the preservatives formaldehyde and methylchloroisothiazolinone (MCI)/methylisothiazolinone (MI) have been reported to appear together at a statistically significant level. Recently, revisions concerning the patch test preparations of MCI/MI, MI and formaldehyde have been recommended for the European baseline series.To investigate (i) the number of concomitant contact allergies to the preservatives, (ii) the number of concomitant contact allergies to the preservatives and the fragrance mixes (FM I and FM II) and (iii) gender differences.Patients tested with the Swedish baseline series during the period 2012-2014 at the Department of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology in Malmö, Sweden were investigated.2165 patients were patch tested with the baseline series (34% males and 66% females). Contact allergies to formaldehyde and MCI/MI and/or MI were significantly associated (p 0.001). The associations between contact allergy to MCI/MI and/or MI and FM I and/or FM II, and between formaldehyde and FM I and/or FM II as well as, were statistically significant (p 0.001).Contact allergies to formaldehyde and MCI/MI and/or MI are significantly associated, as well as contact allergies to these preservatives and fragrance allergy. Males and females do not differ significantly concerning contact allergy to fragrances.

Formaldehyde is a well-known contact sensitizer. Formaldehyde releasers are widely used preservatives in cosmetics.To survey the release of formaldehyde in cosmetics brought by patients investigated because of suspected allergic contact dermatitis, to compare it with information given by the manufacturers on the packages, and to investigate whether formaldehyde-allergic patients are potentially exposed to more cosmetics releasing formaldehyde than dermatitis patients without contact allergy to formaldehyde.Cosmetics from 10 formaldehyde-allergic and 30 non-allergic patients (controls) matched for age and sex were investigated with the chromotropic acid spot test, which is a semiquantitative method measuring the release of formaldehyde.Formaldehyde was found in 58 of 245 (23.7%) products. Twenty-six of 126 (20.6%) leave-on products released formaldehyde, and 17 of 26 (65.4%) of these were not declared to contain formaldehyde or formaldehyde releasers. Among the rinse-off products, there were 32 of 119 (26.8%) formaldehyde-releasing products, and nine of 32 (28.0%) of these were not labelled as containing formaldehyde or formaldehyde releasers. Five of 10 formaldehyde-allergic patients brought leave-on products with ≥ 40 ppm formaldehyde, as compared with 4 of 30 in the control group (p = 0.029).Cosmetic products used by formaldehyde-allergic patients that are not declared to contain formaldehyde or formaldehyde-releasing preservatives should be analysed.