Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology · 2021
Contact dermatitis associated with preservatives: Retrospective analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data, 1994 through 2016.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Atwater Amber Reck, Petty Amy J, Liu Beiyu, Green Cynthia L, Silverberg Jonathan I, DeKoven Joel G, Belsito Donald V, Reeder Margo J, Sasseville Denis, Taylor James S, Maibach Howard I, Zirwas Matthew J, Marks James G, Zug Kathryn A, Fowler Joseph F, Pratt Melanie D, DeLeo Vincent A, Warshaw Erin M
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Preservatives are often necessary components of commercial products. Large-scale North American studies on preservative allergy are limited.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate demographics, positive patch test reactions (PPTRs), clinical relevance, and trends for preservatives tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch testing results of preservatives from 1994 through 2016.
RESULTS: A total of 50,799 patients were tested; 11,338 (22.3%) had a PPTR to at least 1 preservative. The most frequent reactions were to methylisothiazolinone 0.2% aqueous (aq) (12.2%), formaldehyde 2% aq (7.8%), formaldehyde 1% aq (7.8%), quaternium-15 2% petrolatum (pet) (7.7%), and methyldibromo glutaronitrile/phenoxyethanol 2% pet (5.1%). Paraben mix 12% pet (1%), iodopropynyl butylcarbamate 0.1% pet (0.4%), benzyl alcohol 1% pet (0.3%), and phenoxyethanol 1% pet (0.2%) had the lowest PPTRs. Linear regression analysis of preservatives tested showed that only methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone 0.01% aq (parameter estimate, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.17-0.66; P < .005) had a significant increase in PPTRs over time.
LIMITATIONS: Collected variables are dependent on clinical judgment. Results may be prone to referral selection bias.
CONCLUSIONS: This large North American study provides insight on preservative PPTRs and trends from 1994 through 2016.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate demographics, positive patch test reactions (PPTRs), clinical relevance, and trends for preservatives tested by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cross-sectional analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch testing results of preservatives from 1994 through 2016.
RESULTS: A total of 50,799 patients were tested; 11,338 (22.3%) had a PPTR to at least 1 preservative. The most frequent reactions were to methylisothiazolinone 0.2% aqueous (aq) (12.2%), formaldehyde 2% aq (7.8%), formaldehyde 1% aq (7.8%), quaternium-15 2% petrolatum (pet) (7.7%), and methyldibromo glutaronitrile/phenoxyethanol 2% pet (5.1%). Paraben mix 12% pet (1%), iodopropynyl butylcarbamate 0.1% pet (0.4%), benzyl alcohol 1% pet (0.3%), and phenoxyethanol 1% pet (0.2%) had the lowest PPTRs. Linear regression analysis of preservatives tested showed that only methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone 0.01% aq (parameter estimate, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.17-0.66; P < .005) had a significant increase in PPTRs over time.
LIMITATIONS: Collected variables are dependent on clinical judgment. Results may be prone to referral selection bias.
CONCLUSIONS: This large North American study provides insight on preservative PPTRs and trends from 1994 through 2016.