MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1111/cod.14260

Медицинская библиотека · Contact dermatitis · 2022

The prevalence and relevance of patch testing with textile dyes.

Nijman Lars, Rustemeyer Thomas, Franken Sylvie M, Ipenburg Norbertus A

СтатьяПеревод в очереди

Аннотация

BACKGROUND

Textile dye mix (TDM) is included in the European baseline series (EBS), but it is unknown if TDM identifies all patients with a textile dye allergy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the added value of performing patch testing with individual textile dyes in addition to TDM.

METHODS

Two hundred and nine patients suspected to have a contact allergy to textile dyes were patch tested between January 2015 and December 2021 with the EBS, as well as an individual textile dye test series containing textile dyes part of TDM (TDM-dyes) and outside the scope of TDM (non-TDM dyes).

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients (25.8%) tested positive for TDM or an individual textile dye. Disperse Orange 3 (9.6%) followed by Disperse Blue 106 (4.8%) were the most common individual textile dyes causing a positive patch test reaction. Of the 54 dye positive patients, 28 (51.9%) had a clinically relevant reaction. No clinically relevant reactions were seen in patients that solely tested positive for non-TDM dyes.

CONCLUSIONS

It is beneficial to test individual textile dyes in addition to TDM in patients suspected of having a textile dye allergy. Otherwise, 46.3% of the dye positive patients and 35.7% of the patients with a clinically relevant reaction would have been missed.

Для цитирования: Nijman Lars, Rustemeyer Thomas, Franken Sylvie M, Ipenburg Norbertus A. The prevalence and relevance of patch testing with textile dyes.. Contact dermatitis. 2022. DOI: 10.1111/cod.14260.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.