Cause Of Contact Dermatitis Research Articles

Outbreak of contact allergy to dicyclohexylcarbodiimide in a biotechnology laboratory.

Dicyclohexylcarbodiimide (DCC) is known to cause occupational allergic contact dermatitis in biotechnology laboratory workers. This study aimed to assess the prevalence of DCC sensitization among workers of one biosynthesis laboratory and to determine the optimal DCC concentration for patch testing. 23 laboratory workers frequently exposed to DCC of whom 21 suffered from dermatitis and 11 controls were enrolled into the study. All participants underwent skin patch testing with different concentrations of DCC and other substances used in the work environment. Statistical analysis was conducted to compare results between active and control groups. Of the 23 workers tested, 56.5% showed positive reactions to DCC. All of them had dermatitis. Morpholine also elicited positive reactions in 26.1% of workers who were all sensitized to DCC. Dimethylformamide and chloroform yielded negative results. Dicyclohexylcarbodiimide was a major cause of contact dermatitis in the active group indicating an outbreak of contact allergy to DCC in the company necessitating preventive measures. Both DCC 0.1% ac. and DCC 0.05% pet. should both be used for patch testing.

Axillary Contact Dermatitis: An Update on Potential Allergens and Management.

The differential diagnosis of dermatoses in the axillae is broad. Contact dermatitis-both irritant and allergic-represents common etiologies. Axillary contact dermatitis can develop following exposure to a variety of irritants and/or allergens. Frequently implicated sources include deodorants, antiperspirants, detergents, soaps, and clothing. Fragrance, a ubiquitous ingredient within these products, as well as metals and dyes, are common causes of contact dermatitis. Clinical assessment, bedside diagnostic techniques, histopathology, and patch testing can aid in the diagnosis and help inform management directions.

Beauty and the Rash: The Hidden Risks of Cosmetics in Contact Dermatitis

Contact dermatitis is an inflammatory condition of the skin that occurs when it comes into contact with specific substances or irritants. Cosmetics have been identified as a common cause of contact dermatitis. This research will review previous studies on the relationship between cosmetics and contact dermatitis. Research identifying the most common allergens and irritants present in cosmetic products will be analysed, as well as patch tests used to detect possible allergic reactions. The results of studies that have demonstrated the presence of allergens and irritants in cosmetics, as well as the associated skin reactions, will be presented. Contact dermatitis prevention and management strategies will also be discussed, including identification and avoidance of specific allergens, patch testing, and skin care guidelines. The discussion will focus on the importance of education for both consumers and healthcare professionals about the risks of cosmetics in contact dermatitis. In conclusion, cosmetics pose a hidden risk for the development of contact dermatitis. It is critical that both consumers and healthcare professionals are aware of the common allergens and irritants present in cosmetic products, and take appropriate steps to prevent and manage this condition.

2-Octyl cyanoacrylate, a hidden allergen, a common cause of postsurgical allergic contact dermatitis.

Background: 2-Octyl cyanoacrylate, a topical adhesive used for wound closure, is becoming a common cause for rashes in postsurgical patients. There is an increased number of cases of postsurgical contact dermatitis attributable to 2-octyl cyanoacrylate. Localized skin reactions to 2-octyl cyanoacrylate have been described in different case reports, but there are limited case reports of diffuse cutaneous allergic reactions. Objective: The aim of the study was to review our experience in patch testing with cyanoacrylates. Methods: We reported five cases of allergic contact dermatitis to 2-octyl cyanoacrylate, confirmed by a patch test. All the patients experienced a skin reaction a few days after surgery. The patients described an erythematous pruritic rash initially localized over the incision and that subsequently spread to surrounding areas. Two of the five patients developed a more widespread rash, which required a longer duration of systemic steroids. 2-Octyl cyanoacrylate remains an agent of low diagnostic suspicion as the possible cause of contact dermatitis after a surgical procedure. Results: All the patients, but one had a positive reaction to 2-octyl cyanoacrylate on PT. Four had a positive PT result, with one patient having a positive scratch test after a negative PT result. Testing on abraded skin further increased yield. Conclusion: Postsurgical patients should be evaluated by using a patch test if there is a clinical picture suggestive of contact dermatitis.

MOMMY RN DERMATITIS

<h3>Introduction</h3> The COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted the importance of hand hygiene and led to the increased use of sanitizing gels and wipes. Here we describe a case of contact dermatitis due to sanitizing gels and wipes which was misdiagnosed as eczema for 3 years. <h3>Case Description</h3> A 40-year-old Guyanese female presented for evaluation of pruritic rash. She has seen several dermatologists and diagnosed with eczematous dermatitis. She has been prescribed topical 0.1% triamcinolone and a course of oral steroids with temporary improvement in symptoms. She had tried oral antihistamines with no improvement. On interview, she reported a rash predominantly on her hands which began in early 2020 and had worsened in the past year. Social history is significant for working as a registered nurse and having a baby 9 months ago. She admitted to frequent use of Clorox wipes without gloves at home since her baby was born. On exam she had numerous small papules with flare on bilateral dorsal hand, forearm, right orbit, and upper back. Patch testing was done and positive for benzyl alcohol. We recommended she use soap and water to clean her hands, avoid alcohol gels, and use gloves when using antiseptic wipes. She had abrupt improvement in symptoms. <h3>Discussion</h3> This case emphasizes the importance of cleaning gels and wipes as a cause of contact dermatitis. It particularly important to remember in the context of healthcare workers who frequently clean their hands, new parents who may using sanitizing wipes more often, and people with darker colored skin.

Nickel Allergy of the Skin and Beyond.

Hypersensitization to nickel is one of the most common contact allergies in the modern world and it is considered to be a major cause of contact dermatitis, especially for hand eczema. The aim of this paper is to describe many faces of the nickel allergy and to find out different diagnostic, potential strategies for treatment and prevention in hypersensitized patients. A personal clinical experience with practical clinical cases of contact dermatitis to nickel has also been presented. Electronic databases on this topic was carried out using PubMed-Medline. The literature review identified many articles reporting for nickel contact allergy and pointing the metal as number one allergen in the frequency of positive skin patch test reactions in a large population worldwide. Herein, a summary of the current understanding and evidence on nickel allergy with practical approach and proposed recommendations to the dermatologist, general practitioner, and the allergist were prepared. The prevalence of nickel allergy represents an important socio-economical and health issue. Metal is one of the most common sensitizing agents worldwide. The morbidity due to this metal represents the allergic contact dermatitis and it is constantly growing in many countries. There are also cases of systemic allergic contact dermatitis, where they could be easily misdiagnosed as adverse drug reactions, which lead to delay of the correct diagnosis and inappropriate treatment.

High levels of contact dermatitis and decreased mobility in broiler breeders, but neither have a relationship with floor eggs

Contact dermatitis, both on the foot pads and hocks, is a well-known health issue in broilers. Less is known about contact dermatitis in broiler breeders, however, although they have many risk factors for developing leg health problems in common with broilers. This study aimed to describe the prevalence and severity of contact dermatitis during the production cycle in 5 lines of broiler breeders, investigate possible causes of contact dermatitis, and study its relationship with gait, egg production, and floor egg percentage. Five commercially available genetic lines of broiler breeders were housed in 21 pens of 550 females and 50 males from 20 to 60 wk of age. Every 10 wk litter quality, leg health measurements (foot pad dermatitis, hock burn, and gait) and body weight were assessed of 50 random hens per pen. Total number of eggs, number of eggs laid outside the nest (floor eggs), and mortality were recorded daily per pen. Prevalence of foot pad dermatitis, hock burn, and gait problems increased with age. Litter quality started to decrease at 50 wk of age. Prevalence of foot pad dermatitis was affected by litter quality, whereas genetic line had little effect. One genetic line was more prone to developing hock burns, though generally the prevalence of hock burn (13%) was much lower than that of foot pad dermatitis (74%). The percentage of broiler breeders with gait problems increased up to 24% with age, but this was not related to the prevalence of contact dermatitis. The lines differed in body weight from 32 wk of age onwards, and a higher body weight was related to lower egg production and higher cumulative mortality. The percentage of floor eggs was not related to leg health parameters or genetic line. Broiler breeders thus have similar leg health problems as broilers, but these problems are not related to the percentage of floor eggs, suggesting that other factors are involved in the undesirable behavior of floor laying.

How safe is prescribing oral minoxidil in patients allergic to topical minoxidil?

To the Editor: We present 9 female patients (Table I) who became allergic to topical minoxidil and were able to tolerate low-dose oral minoxidil without adverse effects.Table IList of patientsPatientAge, y∗Mean age of 47.2 years (range, 22-72 years).SexTopical minoxidil use, yAdverse effects from topical minoxidilOral minoxidil use, 0.25 mg twice daily, mo†All patients currently on treatment.Adverse effects from oral minoxidil148Female8Scalp pruritus15None247Female12Scalp pruritus, scaling20None372Female14Scalp pruritus, scaling33Mild hypertrichosis on temples449Female3Scalp pruritus, eczematous rash on ears10None554Female1.5Scalp pruritus7None655Female0Scalp pruritus18None731Female0Scalp pruritus, eczematous rash on ears8None847Female4Scalp pruritus, scaling24Mild hypertrichosis on cheeks922Female1Scalp pruritus, eczematous rash on ears18None∗ Mean age of 47.2 years (range, 22-72 years).† All patients currently on treatment. Open table in a new tab Topical minoxidil is the only approved treatment for female pattern hair loss.1Friedman E.S. Friedman P.M. Cohen D.E. Washenik K. Allergic contact dermatitis to topical minoxidil solution: etiology and treatment.J Am Acad Dermatol. 2002; 46: 309-312Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (113) Google Scholar It has a safe profile, and the most common adverse effects include irritant and allergic contact dermatitis and hypertrichosis. Contact dermatitis to commercial minoxidil is often caused by propylene glycol that is present in the 2% and 5% solutions. Patients with contact allergy or irritation to propylene glycol can use the 5% minoxidil foam, which is free of this ingredient. Contact allergy to minoxidil itself is uncommon and requires discontinuation. Our patients had been using topical minoxidil for an average of 4.8 years (range, 1-14 years) (Table I) when an acute contact dermatitis developed. All were patch tested with propylene glycol 30% in water (Chemotechnique Diagnostics, Vellinge, Sweden), 5% commercial minoxidil solution, and 5% commercial minoxidil foam. Patches were removed after 48 hours and the reading was performed at 72 and 96 hours. All 9 patients had a positive patch test result to the 5% minoxidil solution and the foam and a negative patch test result to propylene glycol, indicating that the cause of contact dermatitis was minoxidil itself (Fig 1). Oral minoxidil has been used in the last few years as an off-label treatment both in male and in female pattern hair loss with good clinical efficacy.2Jimenez-Cauhe J. Saceda-Corralo D. Rodrigues-Barata R. et al.Effectiveness and safety of low-dose oral minoxidil in male androgenetic alopecia.J Am Acad Dermatol. 2019; 81: 648-649Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (40) Google Scholar,3Sinclair R.D. Female pattern hair loss: a pilot study investigating combination therapy with low-dose oral minoxidil and spironolactone.Int J Dermatol. 2018; 57: 104-109Crossref PubMed Scopus (58) Google Scholar Proposed doses are different in men than in women, with a range from 0.25 to 1 mg daily.4Ramos P.M. Sinclair R.D. Kasprzak M. Miot H.A. Minoxidil 1 mg oral versus minoxidil 5% topical solution for the treatment of female-pattern hair loss: a randomized clinical trial.J Am Acad Dermatol. 2020; 82: 252-253Abstract Full Text Full Text PDF PubMed Scopus (40) Google Scholar Lower doses are used in women because hypertrichosis is a common adverse effect.3Sinclair R.D. Female pattern hair loss: a pilot study investigating combination therapy with low-dose oral minoxidil and spironolactone.Int J Dermatol. 2018; 57: 104-109Crossref PubMed Scopus (58) Google Scholar Our experience with more than 200 patients on oral minoxidil indicates that 0.5 mg daily is effective and very well tolerated. The possibility that patients with contact allergy to topical minoxidil could safely tolerate oral minoxidil was suggested by the fact that systemic skin reactions to topical or oral minoxidil have never been described. Systemic contact dermatitis refers to a rare diffuse reaction that individuals sensitized to a contact allergen might develop after exposure to the same allergen via a different route. The exact pathophysiology is unknown; however, it appears to be mediated by a type 4 and possibly type 3 hypersensitivity reaction. Cases of systemic contact dermatitis have been reported for propylene glycol5McGowan M.A. Scheman A. Jacob S.E. Propylene glycol in contact dermatitis: a systematic review.Dermatitis. 2018; 29: 6-12Crossref PubMed Scopus (32) Google Scholar but not for minoxidil, so treatment with oral minoxidil was started at the dose of 0.25 mg twice daily. The 0.25-mg capsules were compounded by pharmacies. All of our patients have been using the same dose to date, for an average of 17 months (range, 7-33 months) without any adverse effects. All of them were satisfied with results of treatment. Cardiac adverse effects of oral minoxidil, such as edema, pericarditis, or pericardial effusion, are dose-dependent and have never been reported with low doses. Our experience therefore suggests that oral minoxidil is reasonably safe in patients allergic to topical minoxidil, even if it is advisable to warn patients to stop the medications in case of cutaneous adverse effects.

Irritant Contact Dermatitis: Why It Happens, Who Suffers It and How to Manage

Irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) is defined as a localized skin reaction to irritants which does not require prior sensitization of the immune adaptative system. ICD is a consequence of direct toxic effect of physical or chemical agents resulting in keratinocyte damage. The purpose of this review was to highlight the various aspects of ICD to improve its management. It is now known that ICD is a complex reaction that involved both endogenous and exogenous factors, and does not represent a homogenous entity but can cover various clinical subtypes. The management of ICD is based on its accurate diagnosis and the identification of the irritants if possible. The treatment is based on the avoidance of irritants, and strategies such as personal protective equipment (gloves, barrier creams) to be implemented at the workplace. ICD is the most frequent cause of contact dermatitis. It represents up to 95% of contact dermatitis in occupational context. This review focuses on the practical management of ICD: why it happens, which are the main clinical subtypes and what to do.

Relevance of patch testing and its correlation with clinical patterns of contact dermatitis of hand

&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Background:&lt;/strong&gt; Contact dermatitis of hand is a common dermatoses with different aetiological conditions and different morphologies. The aim of our study is to identify the clinical patterns, causative allergens and the relevance of patch testing for contact dermatitis of hand.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Methods:&lt;/strong&gt; A total of 74 patients with hand eczema were included in our study after getting informed and written consent to do patch tests during December 2016 to May 2017 in our dermatology OPD. Patch test was done by using Indian standard series battery and the readings were taken at 48 hrs and 72 hrs. The results were interpreted according to International Contact Dermatitis Research Group (ICDRG) criteria.&lt;strong&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Results:&lt;/strong&gt; The incidence of hand eczema was 3.2 percent with male: female ratio of 1.55:1. The most common age group affected was 31-40 years. The most common morphological pattern observed in our study was fissured pattern (43%) followed by unspecified pattern (23%), hyperkeratotic (12%), lichenoid (10%), pompholyx (4%), fingertip eczema (1%), ring pattern (1%) and mixed morphology (6%). In our study, current relevance of 79% (31 allergens), doubtful relevance of 15% (6 allergens), and old relevance of 3% (one allergen) was noted. Cross sensitization was observed with one allergen (3%).&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p class="abstract"&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Conclusions:&lt;/strong&gt; Patch testing is a very useful scientific diagnostic tool that unravels the cause of contact dermatitis of hand. Avoidance of the substances responsible for allergy can be advised to the patient.&lt;/p&gt;

Skin Impact of Alcohol-Based Hand Rubs vs Handwashing.

Skin Impact of Alcohol-Based Hand Rubs vs Handwashing.

HUBUNGAN KARAKTERISTIK PEKERJA, KELENGKAPAN DAN HIGIENITAS APD DENGAN KEJADIAN DERMATITIS KONTAK (Studi Kasus Di Rumah Kompos Jambangan Surabaya)

Contact dermatitis is an inflammation of skin which is caused by a substance that sticks to somebody’s skin. The cause of contact dermatitis is physical factor, a substance of plants, and other chemicals. One of prevention contact dermatitis because of working is the usage of personal protection equipments like mask, gloves, goggles, shoes, and body protection. The objectives of this research was to analyze the relation between the characteristics of worker, the completeness and the hygiene of personal protection equipments with the contact dermatitis occurrence in the house of compost Jambangan Surabaya. The methodology of this research was observational using cross sectional approach. The target of this research was all workers who have worked in the house of compost Jambangan Surabaya as 21 people were taken by total sampling technique. The variable that was observed included contact dermatitis occurrence, gender, the history of skin allergy, age, knowledge, attitude, action, and the completeness of using personal protection equipments. The primer data was taken by interview with questionnaire paper and observation. The secondary data was taken from the house of compost Jambangan Surabaya. Then, data that was taken from questionnaire was analyzed by descriptive as the narration form. The result of this research explained that the completeness of using personal protection equipments by the worker have not completed yet and for the main characteristics of the worker was their knowledge. The conclusion was using complete personal protection equipments could prevent contact dermatitis of the worker in the house of compost Jambangan Surabaya. Keywords: Individual characteristics, Completeness and The hygiene of personal protection equipments, Contact dermatitis

Intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility and predictivity of the HaCaSens assay: A skin sensitization test using human keratinocytes, HaCaT

Due to considerable constraints in using animals for risk assessment, much effort has been directed at developing non-animal test methods. Developing assays for skin sensitization, the leading cause of contact dermatitis, is particularly important, but there are currently no in vitro skin sensitization tests that completely replace animal tests.HaCaSens, a simple skin sensitization test using non-transformed HaCaT cells, predicts keratinocyte activation by skin sensitizers with 75% sensitivity, 83% specificity and 77% accuracy in a previous study using 22 coded substances. Although the data show promising results, the number of tested substances is insufficient to prove predictive capacity. Moreover, reproducibility among different laboratories has not been studied.Here, three laboratories participated in a validation in order to assess HaCaSens feasibility for official validation. To examine transferability, intra- and inter-lab reproducibility and predictive capacity, HaCaSens was assessed on a set of 30 test substances coordinated by the Validation Management Team (VMT). The results showed satisfactory transferability as well as intra- and inter-laboratory reproducibility. Further assessment of its predictive capacity on 20 test substances demonstrated a sensitivity of 81.8% (18/22), specificity of 87.5% (7/8), and accuracy of 83.3% (25/30) in identifying skin sensitizers, which is comparable with presently validated assays, KeratinoSens™ and LuSens.This validation study shows that the HaCaSens assay is easily transferable, reproducible and highly predictable for identifying skin sensitizers.

P73: CONTACT ALLERGY TO HAIR DYES (P‐PHENYLENEDIAMINE): A PRELIMINARY REPORT

Hair dye is a popular cosmetic product nowadays. Many strong and extreme sensitising chemicals, such as para-phenylenediamine (PPD), toluene-2,5-diamine (TDA) and other aromatic amines or cross-reacting substances, are ingredients in hair dye products. To study the clinical patterns and PPD contact sensitivity in patients with hair-dye dermatitis. Ninety five (M:F 56:39) consecutive patients aged between 18 and 70 years suspected to have contact allergy from hair dye were studied by patch testing standard patch test series including p-phenylenediamine (PPD, 1.0% pet). Seventy-six (M:F 39:36) patients showed positive patch tests from PPD. Twenty-one of these patients also showed positive patch test reaction from fragrance mix, thiuram mix, paraben mix, or colophony. Fifty-six (74%) patients affected were aged older than 40 years. The duration of dermatitis varied from <1 month to >1 year with exacerbation following hair coloring. Fifty-three (70%) patients had dermatitis of scalp and/or scalp margins and 22 patients (30%) had face and neck dermatitis. Periorbital dermatitis, chronic actinic dermatitis, and erythema multiforme-like lesions were seen in 6, 3, and 2 patients, respectively. Hair dyes and PPD constitute a significant cause of contact dermatitis. There is an urgent need for creating consumer awareness regarding hair-dyes contact sensitivity and the significance of performing sensitivity testing prior to actual use.

Cosmetic preservative labelling on the Thai market.

Preservatives are added to cosmetics and other consumer products to prevent microbial growth and product degradation. Many cosmetic preservatives are skin sensitizers and frequent causes of contact dermatitis. The use of preservatives may vary by country and/or region, according to legislation, and may be reflected in differences in the prevalence rates of preservative allergy worldwide. To examine the type and frequency of preservative use in cosmetics sold in Thai markets in metropolitan Bangkok, Thailand. Preservatives contained in 1000 different cosmetics sold in Thai markets were documented and analysed, based on the labelling of ingredients. Most of the cosmetic and skincare products sold in Thai markets were international brands, with only a small proportion of cosmetic products being produced in Thailand. International brand cosmetics were more likely to contain non-formaldehyde-releasing preservatives than domestically produced brands. Isothiazolinone-based preservatives, which are responsible for the current increase in the prevalence of contact allergy, were found at a significant frequency in domestically produced, leave-on cosmetic products. Preservatives in cosmetics were significantly different according to source of production and type of cosmetics.

The use of patch testing for the diagnosis of contact dermatitis: an Albanian experience

Introduction: The daily increase of using chemical, aromatic and cosmetic products has been associated with significant increase in frequency of skin diseases such as eczemas and contact dermatitis (CD). The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of patch testing (PT) for the diagnosis of CD and provide current data on the frequency of sensitization to various contact allergens among patients with CD in the Albanian population.Methods: We retrospectively analyzed all consecutive patients clinically suspected for CD during the period February 2010 – February 2011, in the outpatient setting. PT was done using Baseline European Series consisting of 31 allergens. Risk factors (age, gender, occupation and place of residence) and sensitization to various contact allergens were evaluated. Results: In total, 193 patients clinically suspected for CD were included in the study and underwent PT. The highest prevalence of CD was found in the age-group of 31-40 years (32.6%), with a statistically significant difference between other age-groups (X2 = 141.2, p&lt;0.01). Positive PT results with at least one allergen were seen in 144 (74.6 %) patients suspected for CD. The two most common allergens were nickel and potassium dichromate. Construction worker and hairdresser were the most affected professions. Females had a chance of 1.8 times higher for having a positive patch test result compare to males (OR = 1.8; 95% CI 0.91 – 3.39).Conclusion: Determination of allergens that cause contact dermatitis is a necessity not only to confirm the correct diagnosis, but also for the qualitative treatment and prevention of the disease. Patch testing, even though an old method, still remain a valuable and non-invasive approach to determine the causes of contact dermatitis.

Contact allergy to acrylates and methacrylates in consumers and nail artists - data of the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology, 2004-2013.

Allergic contact dermatitis caused by (meth)acrylates used in artificial nails is a relevant problem in both nail artists and consumers. To analyse the frequency of this problem in the contact allergy surveillance network Information Network of Departments of Dermatology in 2004-2013, and address possible time trends and patterns of co-sensitization. A retrospective analysis of patch test results with (meth)acrylates, along with clinical and demographic data, was performed. These were used to subdivide patients according to (i) a potentially exposed occupation and (ii) nail cosmetics as the suspected cause of contact dermatitis. Among the 114 440 patients patch tested, 72 244 were female and were considered further. Eighty-seven patients both worked as nail artists/cosmetologists and suspected nail cosmetics as the cause of dermatitis. Among these, 47.1% reacted to at least one (meth)acrylate, most often to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (n = 27), 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate, and hydroxyethyl acrylate (n = 26 each), with marked coupled reactivity. In other subgroups of interest, frequencies of sensitization to (meth)acrylates were less elevated but higher than in all remaining female patients (n = 69 419). The results indicate a not entirely common, but potentially serious, problem, especially concerning occupationally exposed, and sensitized, nail artists. Adequate protective measures should be taught as part of the vocational training.

Hair dye dermatitis and p-phenylenediamine contact sensitivity: A preliminary report.

Background:The contact allergic reactions from p-phenylenediamine (PPD) in hair dyes vary from mild contact dermatitis to severe life- threatening events (angioedema, bronchospasm, asthma, renal impairment).Objectives:To study the clinical patterns and PPD contact sensitivity in patients with hair-dye dermatitis.Materials and Methods:Eighty (M:F 47:33) consecutive patients aged between 18 and 74 years suspected to have contact allergy from hair dye were studied by patch testing with Indian Standard Series including p-phenylenediamine (PPD, 1.0% pet).Results:54 Fifty-four (M:F 21:33) patients showed positive patch tests from PPD. Eight of these patients also showed positive patch test reaction from fragrance mix, thiuram mix, paraben mix, or colophony. Fifty-seven (71%) patients affected were aged older than 40 years. The duration of dermatitis varied from < 1 month to > 1 year with exacerbation following hair coloring. Forty-nine patients had dermatitis of scalp and/or scalp margins and 23 patients had face and neck dermatitis. Periorbital dermatitis, chronic actinic dermatitis, and erythema multiforme-like lesions were seen in 4, 2, and 1 patients, respectively.Conclusions:Hair dyes and PPD constitute a significant cause of contact dermatitis. There is an urgent need for creating consumer awareness regarding hair-dyes contact sensitivity and the significance of performing sensitivity testing prior to actual use.

Severe contact dermatitis induced by an unusual blend of pure henna

Henna is a natural dye extracted from Lawsonia inermis leaves and is commonly used all over the world to dye skin, hair and leather. Pure henna is rarely reported as a cause of contact dermatitis. However, in many reports, additives of henna, especially paraphenylenediamine, have been accused of irritant and allergic contact dermatitis. This report is not only exhibiting a rare form of contact dermatitis resembling a chemical burn, but is also providing an insight into henna, which is widely used and commonly seen as safe.

Unusual food allergy: Alioidea allergic reactions overview.

Allergic reactions can cause by several aliments and foods. Symptoms usually appear after ingestion, several hours after consumption or even almost immediately. Various food allergies can lead to serious diseases and in some cases to death, so the priority for people suffering from them should be prevention and completely avoiding foods that cause this kind of reactions. Allergy to Alioidea is one of the probable causes of contact dermatitis, gingival and oculonasal diseases and asthma. In this review, we will focus on the increasing incidence of allergy to foods of common use like onions and garlic. In the last ten years, the world production of onions and garlic has increased of at least 25%. People make large use of them, not only in cookery but also from a therapeutic point of view. Their growing use is producing more and more specific, insidious and sometimes serious medical conditions, which highly influence the quality of life of patients. Medical practitioners should be able to recognize immediately these disorders in order to diagnose them quickly and accurately, avoiding unnecessary tests and treatments. We will also describe new patents for detecting food allergens.