medigraphic.com
ISSN 0210-5187 (Electronic)

2006, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Med Cutan Iber Lat Am 2006; 34 (4)

Contact dermatitis by PPD: a problematic sensitizier

Vilaplana J, Romaguera C

Language: Spanish
References: 33
Page: 173-178
PDF size: 264.63 Kb.


ABSTRACT

A 52 year-old housewife, who during the last ten years, has been practiced three patch-tests. In Jannuary of 1993 the standard patch test with a hairdressing series due to a dye allergy, In March 1996 the footwear series and fi nally, in March of 2003 the textile series because she was suffering a contact eczema caused by a par of trousers.
In all three cases only a positive patch test to para-phenylenidiamine(PPD) was obtained with any crossed reaction.


REFERENCES

  1. Conde-Salazar L, del-Rio E, Guimaraens D, Gonzalez Domingo A. Type IV allergy to rubber additives: a 10-year study of 686 cases. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1993;29:176-80.

  2. Seidenari S, Giusti F, Massone F, Mantovani L. Sensitization to disperse dyes in a patch test population over a fi ve-year period. Am J Contact Dermat. 2002;13:101-7.

  3. Fautz R, Fuchs A, van der Walle H, Henny V, Smits L. Hair dye-sensitized hairdressers: the cross-reaction pat tern with new generation hair dyes. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;46:319-24.

  4. Goon AT, Gilmour NJ, Basket ter DA, White IR, Rycroft RJ, McFadden JP. High frequency of simultaneous sensitivity to Disperse Orange 3 in patients with positive patch tests to para-phenylenediamine. Contact Dermatitis. 2003;48:248-50.

  5. 5 . Nakagawa M, Kawai K, Kawai K. Multiple azo disperse dye sensitization mainly due to group sensitizations to azo dyes. Contact Dermatitis. 1996;34:6-11.

  6. Seidenari S, Giusti F, Massone F, Mantovani L. Sensitization to disperse dyes in a patch test population over a fi ve-year period. Am J Contact Dermat. 2002;13:101-7.

  7. Goon AT, Gilmour NJ, Basket ter DA, White IR, Rycroft RJ, McFadden JP. High frequency of simultaneous sensitivity to Disperse Orange 3 in patients with positive patch tests to para-phenylenediamine. Contact Dermatitis. 2003;48:248-50.

  8. Epstein E. Shoe contact dermatitis. JAMA. 1969;209:1487-92.

  9. Leppard BJ, Parhizgar B. Contact dermatitis to PPD rubber in Maleki shoes. Contact Dermatitis. 1977;3:91-3.

  10. Romaguera C, Grimalt F, Vilaplana J. Shoe contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1988;18):178.

  11. Romaguera C, Vilaplana J. Contact dermatitis in children: 6 years experience (1992-1997). Contact Dermatitis. 1998;39:277-80.

  12. Wolf R, Orion E, Matz H. Contact dermatitis in military personnel. Clin Dermatol. 2002;20:439-44. Review

  13. Trattner A, Farchi Y, David M. Shoe contact dermatitis in Israel. Am J Contact Dermat. 2003;14:12-4.

  14. Munsey WF. Diphenhydramine for local anesthesia in caine sensitive patients. A case report. J Am Podiatry Assoc. 1966;56: 25-6.

  15. Levy SM, Baker KA. Considerations in differential diagnosis of adverse reactions to local anesthetic: report of case. J Am Dent Assoc. 1986;113:271-3.

  16. Ruzicka T, Gerstmeier M, Ring J. Allergy to local anesthetics Z Hautkr. 1987;62:455-60.

  17. Beck MH, Holden A. Benzocaine- -an unsatisfactory indicator of topical local anaesthetic sensitization for the U.K. Br J Dermatol. 1988;118:91-4.

  18. Enders F, Przybilla B, Ring J, Burg G, Braun-Falco O. Epicutaneous testing with a standard series. Results in 12,026 patients. Hautarzt. 1988;39:779-86.

  19. Kreilgard B, Hansen J, Fischer T. Chemical, pharmaceutical and clinical standardization of the TRUE Test caine mix. Contact Dermatitis. 1989;21:23-7.

  20. Sidhu SK, Shaw S, Wilkinson JD. A 10-year retrospective study on benzocaine allergy in the United Kingdom. Am J Contact Dermat. 1999;10:57-61.

  21. Holtzer CD, Flaher ty JF Jr, Coleman RL. Cross-react ivi ty in HIV-infected patients switched from trimethoprim sulfamethoxazole to dapsone. Pharmacotherapy. 1998;18:831-5.

  22. Schnyder B, Burkhart C, Schnyder-Frutig K, von Greyerz S, Naisbitt DJ, Pirmohamed M, Park BK, Pichler WJ. Recognition of sulfamethoxazole and its reactive metabolites by drug-specifi c CD4+ T cells from allergic individuals. J Immunol. 2000;164:6647-54.

  23. Strom BL, Schinnar R, Apter AJ, Margolis DJ, Lautenbach E, Hennessy S, Bilker WB, Pettitt D. Absence of cross-reactivity between sulfonamide antibiotics and sulfonamide nonantibiotics. N Engl J Med. 2003;349:1628-35.

  24. Saxon A, Macy E. Cross-reactivity and sulfonamide antibiotics. N Engl J Med. 2004;350:302-3; author reply 302-3.

  25. Negreiros EB, Almeida CA, de Viveiros MB, Cury J. [Sensitization to the para group: a constant or occasional phenomenon?] Rev Bras Med. 1966;23:236-7.

  26. Dungemann H, Borelli S. [Studies on group allergies of aromatic amino compounds. Test results on so-called „para group“ allergies] Berufsdermatosen. 1966;14:281-95.

  27. Gontijo J. Drug-induced dermatoses caused by substances of the para group. Hospital (Rio J). 1968;73:1225-43.

  28. Kleniewska D. Studies on hypersensitivity to para group. Berufsdermatosen. 1975;23:31- 6.

  29. Kleniewska D, Rudzki E. Allergy pattern to Para group compounds. Przegl Dermatol. 1976;(6 Suppl):251-3.

  30. Seidenari S, Mantovani L, Manzini BM, Pignatti M. Cross-sensitizations between azo dyes and para-amino compound. A study of 236 azo-dye-sensitive subjects. Contact Dermatitis. 1997;36:91-6.

  31. Lisi P, Hansel K. Is benzoquinone the prohapten in cross-sensitivity among aminobenzene compounds? Contact Dermatitis. 1998;39:304-6.

  32. Uter W, Lessmann H, Geier J, Becker D, Fuchs T, Richter G; IVDK Study Group; German Contact Dermatitis Research Group (DKG). The spectrum of allergic (cross-) sensitivity in clinical patch testing with para amino compounds. Allergy. 2002;57:319-22.

  33. Dawe S, White I, Rycroft R, Mc Fadden J. A 10-years review to determine wether exposure to p-phenilenediamine during patch-test leads to sensitization. Contact Dermatitis 2004;50:128.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com