Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland) · 2003
Cellular phone dermatitis with chromate allergy.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Seishima Mariko, Oyama Zuiei, Oda Makiko
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: A patient with allergic contact dermatitis caused by hexavalent chromium plating on a cellular phone has already been reported.
OBJECTIVES: This study described the clinical characteristics and results of patch tests in 8 patients with contact dermatitis possibly caused by handling a cellular phone.
PATIENTS: The 8 patients were 4 males and 4 females aged from 14 to 54 years. They each noticed skin eruptions after 9-25 days of using a cellular phone. All patients had erythema, and 7 had papules on the hemilateral auricle or in the preauricular region. Three of 8 patients had a history of metal allergy. Chromate, aluminium and acrylnitrile-butadiene-styrene copolymer were used as plating on the cellular phones used by these patients.
METHODS: Closed patch tests and photopatch tests were performed using metal standard antigens.
RESULTS: The patch test was positive for 0.5, 0.1 and 0.05% potassium dichromate in all 8 patients. The photopatch test showed the same results. One patient was positive for 2% cobalt chloride and one for 5% nickel sulfate.
CONCLUSION: It is important to consider the possibility of contact dermatitis due to a cellular phone, possibly caused by chromate, when the patients have erythema and papules on the hemilateral auricle or in the preauricular region.
OBJECTIVES: This study described the clinical characteristics and results of patch tests in 8 patients with contact dermatitis possibly caused by handling a cellular phone.
PATIENTS: The 8 patients were 4 males and 4 females aged from 14 to 54 years. They each noticed skin eruptions after 9-25 days of using a cellular phone. All patients had erythema, and 7 had papules on the hemilateral auricle or in the preauricular region. Three of 8 patients had a history of metal allergy. Chromate, aluminium and acrylnitrile-butadiene-styrene copolymer were used as plating on the cellular phones used by these patients.
METHODS: Closed patch tests and photopatch tests were performed using metal standard antigens.
RESULTS: The patch test was positive for 0.5, 0.1 and 0.05% potassium dichromate in all 8 patients. The photopatch test showed the same results. One patient was positive for 2% cobalt chloride and one for 5% nickel sulfate.
CONCLUSION: It is important to consider the possibility of contact dermatitis due to a cellular phone, possibly caused by chromate, when the patients have erythema and papules on the hemilateral auricle or in the preauricular region.