medigraphic.com
Órgano oficial de la Sociedad Mexicana de Cirugía Dermatológica y Oncológica, AC

2007, Number 1

Dermatología Cosmética, Médica y Quirúrgica 2007; 5 (1)

A study of airborne contact dermatitis with standard patch, photo-patch and a plant patch series in the Dermatology Service Unit of Dr. Manuel Gea González General Hospital

Fernández-Mejía S, Vega-Memije E, Ancona-Alayón A, Moreno-Coutiño G, Domínguez-Soto L

Language: Spanish
References: 27
Page: 15-20
PDF size: 397.09 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: Airborne contact dermatitis is considered in many cases as an occupational disease. Diagnosis is made with a positive photo-patch test in order to identify specific allergens. We report our experience at DR. MANUEL GEA GONZÁLEZ General Hospital.
Methods: A descriptive, open, prospective and transversal study was used. Thirty-two patients with diagnosis of contact dermatitis with at least six months of evolution were included. Patch tests were applied using the European plant and Scandinavian photopatch series from Chemotechnique Diagnostics Company.
Results: Nine patients (29%) had a positive result with the photo-patch test. Perfumes and usnic acid were the most frequent allergens. Eight individuals (25.8%) in the plant series and 28 in the standard series tested positive (90%).
Conclusions: The frequency of airborne contact dermatitis was 54.8% when included standard, plant and photopatch series. The most important etiological agents were plants, perfumes, potassium dichromate, and Balsam of Peru. Thus, the application of standard, plant and photo-patch series is important for the diagnosis and treatment of these patients.


REFERENCES

  1. Adams, Robert. Reflecting on Developments in Occupational Dermatitis. Clinics in Dermatology 1997; 15: 473-477

  2. Andersen, Klaus; Frankild, Soren. Allergic Contact Dermatitis. Clinics in Dermatology 1997; 15: 645-654

  3. Basketter, David; Reynolds, Fiona; York, Michael. Predictive testing in contact dermatitis, Irritant Dermatitis. Clinics in Dermatology 1997; 15: 637-644

  4. De Leo, Vincet; Sylvia M Suárez; Martha J Maso. Photoallergic Contact Dermatitis. Arch Dermatol 1991; 128: 1513-1518

  5. Stingeni L; E Agea, P Lisi et al. T-lymphocyte cytokine profiles in Compositae airborne dermatitis. Br J Dermatol 1999; 141: 689-693

  6. Wakelin SH, P Marren, E Young et al. Compositae sensitivity and chronic hand dermatitis in a seven year old boy. Br J Dermatol 1997; 137: 289-291

  7. Fotiades, John; Nicholas A Soter, Henry W Lim. Results of evaluation of 203 patients for photosensitivity in a 7.3 year period. J Am Acad Dermatol 1995; 33(4): 597-602

  8. Guin Jere D, Grant Skidmore. Compositae Dermatitis in Childhood. Arch Dermatol 1987; 123: 500-502

  9. Ockenfels HM, U Seemann, M Goos. Contact Allergy in Patients with Periorbital Eczema: An Analysis of Allergens. Dermatology 1997; 195: 119-124

  10. 10.Máspero J, S Maglio, J Porta, et al. Estudio Inmunohistoquímico de lesiones de dermatitis atópica y de prueba de parche con alergenos. Arch Argent Alergia Inmunol y Clin 1997; 28: 7-12

  11. Whitmore E. Should Atopic individuals be patch tested? Dermatologic clinics 1994; Vol. 12 (2): 491-499

  12. Isaksson, Marlene; Bruze Magnus. Photocontact Dermatitis, Photopatch Testing. Clinics in Dermatology 1997; 15: 615-618

  13. Koh, David; Leok Chee. Occupational Dermatology. Clinics in Dermatology 1998; 16: 113-118

  14. Leok, Chee. Nonoccupational Contact Dermatitis. Clinics in Dermatology 1998; 16: 119-127

  15. Leok Chee. Prognosis of Contact and Occupational Dermatitis. Clinics in Dermatology 1997; 15: 655- 659

  16. Lim Henry W, David Cohen, Nicholas A Soter. Chronic actinic dermatitis: Results of patch and photopatch tests with Compositae, fragrances and pesticides. J Am Acad Dermatol 1998; 38 (1): 108-111

  17. Loti, Toriello; Menchini, Giovanni; Teofoli, Patricia. The Challenge of Airborne Dermatitis. Clinics in Dermatology 1998; 16: 27-31

  18. Bjorkner, E. Industrial Airborne dermatoses. Dermatologic Clinics 1994; vol 12 (2): 501-509

  19. Goulden V; SM Wilkinson. Patch testing for Compositae allergy. Br J Dermatol. 1998; 138: 1018-1021

  20. 20.Todd DJ, Handley J, Metwali M, et al. Day 4 is better than Day 3 for a single Patch Test Reading. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 34: 402-404

  21. Wolf, Ron; Oumeish, Youssef. Photodermatoses. Clinics in Dermatology 1998; 16: 41-57

  22. 22.Hölzle E, N Neumann, B Hausen, et al. Photopatch testing: The 5 year experience of the German, Austrian, and Swiss Photopatch Test Group. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1991; 25 (1): 59-68

  23. Menagé H de P, JS Ross, PG Norris, et al. Contact and photocontact sensitization in chronic actinic dermatitis: sesquiterpene lactone mix is an important allergen. Br J Dermatol 1995; 132: 543-547

  24. Goulden V, SM Wilkinson. Patch testing for Compositae allergy. Br J Dermatol 1998; 138: 1018-1021

  25. Ortiz de Frutos Fco Javier, Jesús de la Cuadra Oyanguren, Jesús Gardeazabal García, et al. Resultados del fotoparche empleando la batería de fotoalergenos estándar del Grupo Español de Fotobiología. Actas Dermosifiliogr 1999; 90: 609-611

  26. 26.Bjorkner E. Industrial Airborne dermatoses. Dermatologic Clinics 1994; Vol. 12 (2): 501-509

  27. McGovern Thomas, Barkley Theodore M. Botanical Dermatology. Int J Dermatol 1998; 37: 321-334




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com