Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2016
Contact allergy to rubber accelerators remains prevalent: retrospective results from a tertiary clinic suggesting an association with facial dermatitis.
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.
Schwensen J F, Menné T, Johansen J D, Thyssen J P
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Chemicals used for the manufacturing of rubber are known causes of allergic contact dermatitis on the hands. Recent European studies have suggested a decrease in thiuram contact allergy. Moreover, while an association with hand dermatitis is well established, we have recently observed several clinical cases with allergic facial dermatitis to rubber.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate temporal trends of contact allergy to rubber accelerators from the European baseline series in a tertiary patch test clinic in Denmark, and examine associations with anatomical locations of dermatitis.
METHODS: Patch test and clinical data collected in a Danish tertiary dermatology clinic in Gentofte, Herlev, Copenhagen between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2014 were analysed. The following rubber accelerators or mixtures in petrolatum from the European baseline patch test series were included: thiuram mix 1.0%, mercaptobenzothiazole 2.0% and mercapto mix 1.0%.
RESULTS: The overall prevalence of contact allergy to rubber accelerators was 3.1% with no significant change during the study period (Ptrend = 0.667). Contact allergy to thiuram mix was the most prevalent and was significantly associated with occupational contact dermatitis, hand dermatitis, age >40 years and facial dermatitis in adjusted binary logistic regression analysis. Current clinical relevance of contact allergy to thiuram mix was 59.3%. Patients with contact allergy to mercapto mix and mercaptobenzothiazole had a concomitant reaction to thiuram mix in 35.2% (19/54) and 35.4% (17/48) of the cases respectively.
CONCLUSION: Contact allergy to rubber accelerators remains prevalent. Clinicians should be aware of the hitherto unexplored clinical association with facial dermatitis.
OBJECTIVES: To evaluate temporal trends of contact allergy to rubber accelerators from the European baseline series in a tertiary patch test clinic in Denmark, and examine associations with anatomical locations of dermatitis.
METHODS: Patch test and clinical data collected in a Danish tertiary dermatology clinic in Gentofte, Herlev, Copenhagen between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2014 were analysed. The following rubber accelerators or mixtures in petrolatum from the European baseline patch test series were included: thiuram mix 1.0%, mercaptobenzothiazole 2.0% and mercapto mix 1.0%.
RESULTS: The overall prevalence of contact allergy to rubber accelerators was 3.1% with no significant change during the study period (Ptrend = 0.667). Contact allergy to thiuram mix was the most prevalent and was significantly associated with occupational contact dermatitis, hand dermatitis, age >40 years and facial dermatitis in adjusted binary logistic regression analysis. Current clinical relevance of contact allergy to thiuram mix was 59.3%. Patients with contact allergy to mercapto mix and mercaptobenzothiazole had a concomitant reaction to thiuram mix in 35.2% (19/54) and 35.4% (17/48) of the cases respectively.
CONCLUSION: Contact allergy to rubber accelerators remains prevalent. Clinicians should be aware of the hitherto unexplored clinical association with facial dermatitis.