Journal of cutaneous medicine and surgery · 2015
Contact Dermatitis to Personal Sporting Equipment in Youth.
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.
Marzario Barbara, Burrows Dianne, Skotnicki Sandy
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Contact dermatitis to personal sporting equipment in youth is poorly studied.
OBJECTIVE: To review the results of patch testing 6 youth to their sporting equipment in a dermatology general private practice from 2006 to 2011.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 6 youth aged 11 to 14 who were evaluated for chronic and persistent dermatitis occurring in relation to sports equipment was conducted. All patients were subjected to epicutaneous (patch) testing, which included some or all of the following: North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACGD) series, textile series, rubber series, corticosteroid series, and raw material from the patients' own personal equipment.
RESULTS: All cases had 1 or more positive patch test reactions to an allergen within the aforementioned series, and 3 subjects tested positive to their personal equipment in raw form.
CONCLUSIONS: Allergic contact dermatitis, not irritant, was deemed the relevant cause of chronic dermatitis in 4 of the 6 patients due to positive reactions to epicutaneous tests and/or personal equipment. The utility of testing to patients' own sporting equipment was shown to be of additional value and should be considered when patch testing for contact allergy to sporting equipment.
OBJECTIVE: To review the results of patch testing 6 youth to their sporting equipment in a dermatology general private practice from 2006 to 2011.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of 6 youth aged 11 to 14 who were evaluated for chronic and persistent dermatitis occurring in relation to sports equipment was conducted. All patients were subjected to epicutaneous (patch) testing, which included some or all of the following: North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACGD) series, textile series, rubber series, corticosteroid series, and raw material from the patients' own personal equipment.
RESULTS: All cases had 1 or more positive patch test reactions to an allergen within the aforementioned series, and 3 subjects tested positive to their personal equipment in raw form.
CONCLUSIONS: Allergic contact dermatitis, not irritant, was deemed the relevant cause of chronic dermatitis in 4 of the 6 patients due to positive reactions to epicutaneous tests and/or personal equipment. The utility of testing to patients' own sporting equipment was shown to be of additional value and should be considered when patch testing for contact allergy to sporting equipment.