RESUMEN

Brazilian peppertree (Schinus terebinthifolia), a member of the Anacardiaceae family, has invaded territory throughout the world, including the southeastern and western United States. Similar to fellow family members poison ivy and poison oak, Brazilian peppertree causes allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in susceptible individuals. As this pest increases its range, dermatologists living in endemic areas should familiarize themselves with Brazilian peppertree, its effects on the skin, and how to treat any associated ACD.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Atopic dermatitis (AD) is a chronic and relapsing inflammatory skin disease mainly affecting children. Similarly, Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is an inflammatory skin disease, but unlike AD it results from direct exposure to an external agent. Theoretically, the impaired skin barrier facilitates the penetration of potential allergens. Therefore, AD patients are at risk for an associated ACD, exacerbating their skin condition. Because eczema is similar, performing a patch test (PT) for the differential diagnosis is essential. METHODS: In this cross-sectional transversal study, we performed a PT with 30 sensitizers in 26 children with AD, selected according to established criteria for suspected ACD, and treated at an AD center of a pediatric university hospital in Rio de Janeiro. Clinical presentation, patient profile, main sensitizers, and frequency of ACD caused by therapeutic skincare products were evaluated. RESULTS: In all, 23 (88.5%) patients reacted to at least one allergen, 21 (80.7%) had a relevant positive patch test, and 15 (57.7%) were polysensitized. The main positive sensitizers were nickel (38.5%), blue disperse (30.8%), fragrance mix (30.8%), and neomycin (23.1%). Nineteen (73%) patients reacted to substances present in therapeutic or skincare products. CONCLUSION: Our data underscore the importance of performing a PT in AD children whose eczema has atypical distribution. The expressive percentage of positive tests, especially of allergens in skincare products, indicates the constant need to review the proposed treatments. Therefore, we recommend a specific and expanded PT battery for pediatric AD patients, including a negative control, to increase sensitivity for diagnosing ACD.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Hand eczema (HE) is a highly prevalent, recurrent, and multifactorial disease. It encompasses a group of eczematous diseases that affect the hands, etiologically classified into irritant contact dermatitis (ICD), allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and atopic dermatitis (AD). Few epidemiological studies in Latin America have investigated the characteristics of patients with this condition and the origin of the disease. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the profile of patients diagnosed with HE submitted to patch tests aiming to determine its etiology. METHODS: A retrospective descriptive study was carried out on epidemiological data and patch tests of patients with HE treated at a tertiary hospital in the city of São Paulo from January 2013 to December 2020. RESULTS: A total of 173 patients were studied, whose final diagnosis was 61.8% of ICD, 23.1% of ACD and 5.2% of AD, with diagnostic overlap in 42.8% of the cases. The main positive and relevant patch tests were: Kathon CG (42%), nickel sulfate (33%), and thiuram mix (18%). STUDY LIMITATIONS: The number of treated cases and socioeconomic profile was limited to a vulnerable population group. CONCLUSION: HE is a diagnosis in which overlapping etiologies are frequent, with the main sensitizers identified in ACD being Kathon CG, nickel sulfate and thiuram mix.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Propolis is a lipophilic resin extracted from plants by bees. The purpose of this case report was to show the importance of this substance as cause of allergic contact cheilitis. A 21-year-old female patient complained of pruritic perioral eczema for 5 years. In the past months it also affected the neck. After diagnosing contact dermatitis, she was submitted to a patch test with a Latin American baseline series. The result was strongly positive for propolis (++) and weakly positive for perfume mix I (+). After the test, the patient revealed she had been using propolis drops, per oris, for 10 years. The worsening of the condition was due to increased dose, aiming "to improve immunity", during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The contact allergy to propolis might be increasing due to the widespread use of natural products. Propolis is a sensitizer to be considered in patients with long-lasting cheilitis.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

ABSTRACT Propolis is a lipophilic resin extracted from plants by bees. The purpose of this case report was to show the importance of this substance as cause of allergic contact cheilitis. A 21-year-old female patient complained of pruritic perioral eczema for 5 years. In the past months it also affected the neck. After diagnosing contact dermatitis, she was submitted to a patch test with a Latin American baseline series. The result was strongly positive for propolis (++) and weakly positive for perfume mix I (+). After the test, the patient revealed she had been using propolis drops, per oris, for 10 years. The worsening of the condition was due to increased dose, aiming "to improve immunity", during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The contact allergy to propolis might be increasing due to the widespread use of natural products. Propolis is a sensitizer to be considered in patients with long-lasting cheilitis.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Surfactants, many of which are used as detergents, can be found in many common household items, such as shampoos, conditioners, soaps, and cosmetics. One should recognize the multitude of surfactants that are used in today's products to identify any potential allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) or irritant contact dermatitis (ICD). Given their abundance in everyday products, it is understandable that many cases of occupational contact dermatitis that arise can be attributed to surfactants. The products most connected with ACD are cocamidopropyl betaine, oleamidopropyl dimethylamine, decyl glucoside, 3-dimethylaminopropylamine, amidoamine, and cocamide diethanolamine. Similarly, the most common surfactant-related causes of ICD are sodium lauryl sulfate and benzalkonium chloride. It is important for dermatologists to identify the causes and differentiate between the two, to adjust treatments and products accordingly. Here, the most frequently used surfactants, as well as their correlation between ACD and ICD, will be reviewed.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

SUMMARY: Topical treatments in ophthalmologic therapy are significant for the development of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in the periorbital region. Preservatives, antibiotics, glucocorticoids, and beta-blocker eye drops are defined as drugs with the highest sensitizing potential. The unavailability of patch test batteries containing substances of ophthalmological use makes it difficult for this diagnosis. In the present report, we describe six patients who developed ACD induced by different agents presenting in eye drops, confirmed with the cutaneous patch tests. The ACD diagnosis due to ophthalmic medications can be challenging, since many different agents can cause it, and the sensitivity of these cutaneous tests is low. Thus, early diagnosis is essential to avoid the complications of ACD on the skin and ocular disorders related to chronic periorbital eczema.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Because Myroxylon pereirae (MP), or balsam of Peru, is nowadays almost not used "as such," and fragrance mix 1 (FM1) apparently is more sensitive in detecting fragrance allergy, the usefulness of testing MP in baseline series was recently questioned. OBJECTIVES: Identification of the number of clinically relevant patch test reactions to MP not detected by FM1. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 12 030 patients patch tested with MP and FM1 for contact dermatitis between January 2018 and December 2019 in 13 Italian dermatology clinics. RESULTS: Four hundred thirty-nine patients (3.6%) had a positive patch test reaction to MP; 437 (3.6%) had a positive patch test reaction to FM1. Positive reactions to both MP and FM1 were observed in 119 subjects (1.0%), 310 (2.6%) reacted to MP only, 304 (2.5%) to FM1 only, 5 to MP and sorbitan sesquioleate (SSO), 9 to FM1 and SSO, and 5 to MP, FM1, and SSO. Single sensitizations were clinically relevant in 75.2% of cases for MP (62.9% current, 12.3% past) and 76.3% for FM1 (70.1% current, 6.2% past). CONCLUSIONS: Based on our results, MP appears to be still worth testing along with FM1 in baseline series, because it allows detection of a remarkable number of fragrance allergies, often relevant, which would be otherwise missed.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

RESUMO: Dermatite alérgica de contato é uma doença cutânea inflamatória, não infecciosa, cuja base do tratamento é a identificação e eliminação do agente causal. Cocoamidopropil betaína é um surfactante muito utilizado nos produtos de uso pessoal, notadamente de uso capilar. Essa substância não está presente na bateria padrão brasileira. Neomicina é um antibiótico usado em preparações tópicas. Objetivamos mostrar paciente que desenvolveu alergia no couro cabeludo e que fez erroneamente automedicação com produto que continha substância a qual era ainda mais sensível. O caso é de uma mulher, 36 anos, evoluindo há dois meses com eczema pruriginoso, em áreas de implantação capilar e nuca. Relatava progressiva piora. Diante da suspeita de dermatite de contato, foi realizado teste de contato, utilizando-se da bateria padrão Latino-Americana. Com 96 horas (D4) evidenciou-se positividade leve (+) para cocoamidopropil betaína e forte (++) para neomicina. O resultado positivo para a neomicina foi intrigante, uma vez que a observação do rótulo dos produtos de uso pessoal não a continha. Diante do resultado do teste, após ser questionada novamente, ela confirmou a omissão da automedicação diária com pomada de neomicina. Em conclusão, mostramos a alergia a produtos de uso capilar. Reforçamos a necessidade de se fazer um teste de contato com bateria padrão atualizada. Por fim, alertamos sobre o risco da automedicação. (AU)

ABSTRACT: Allergic contact dermatitis is an inflammatory, non-infectious skin disease. The treatment is based on the identification and elimination of the causal agent. Cocamidopropyl betaine is a surfactant widely used in products for personal use, especially capillary use. This substance is not present in the Brazilian baseline series. Neomycin is an antibiotic used in topical preparations. We aimed to show a patient who developed na allergy in the scalp and mistakenly self-medicated with a product that contained a substance to which it was even more sensitive. The case is of a woman, 36 years old, evolving for 2 months with pruritic eczema, in areas of capillary and nape implantation. She reported progressive worsening. When contact dermatitis was suspected, a contact test was performed using the Latin American baseline series. At 96 hours (D4) there was mild positivity (+) for cocamidopropyl betaine and strong (++) for neomycin. The positive result for neomycin was intriguing, since the observation of the label of products for personal use did not contain it. In view of the test result, after being questioned again, she confirmed the omission of daily self-medication with neomycin ointment. In conclusion, we showed the allergy to hair products. We reinforced the need for an updated baseline series patch test. Finally, we warned about the risk of self-medication. (AU)

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Abstract Background: Cosmetics are part of the daily life of the population, and their use can lead to allergic contact dermatitis. Objectives: To assess the profile of patients diagnosed with allergic contact dermatitis to cosmetics treated at a referral center for 13 years, as well as the characteristics of the clinical picture and allergens involved. Methods: This was a retrospective study, with analysis of medical records of patients attended at this service. The individuals included had a diagnostic hypothesis of allergic contact dermatitis to cosmetics and had previously been submitted to epicutaneous tests. Results: A total of 1405 medical records were analyzed, 403 (28.7%) with suspected allergic contact dermatitis to cosmetics and 232 (16.5%) with confirmed diagnosis. Of these, 208 (89.7%) were women, and the age group most affected was 31 − 60 years. The most common locations were face in 195 cases (25.8%), cervical region in 116 (15.3%), and trunk in 96 (12.6%). The main allergens in the contact tests were toluene-sulfonamide-formaldehyde resin in 69 cases (29.7%), paraphenylenediamine in 54 (26.3%), Kathon CG® in 41 (20.7%), and fragrance-mix 1 in 29 (16.4%). In 154 (66.4%) of the 232 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis to cosmetics it was possible to specify the cosmetic product responsible for the lesions. Study limitations: The absence of some allergens considered important in the world as causes of allergic contact dermatitis, which are not readily accessible among us. Conclusions: The data of the analyzed population (predominance of young women), as well as the location of the lesions (face and cervical area) and the main allergens involved were consistent with those from the world literature.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Cosmetics are part of the daily life of the population, and their use can lead to allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVES: To assess the profile of patients diagnosed with allergic contact dermatitis to cosmetics treated at a referral center for 13 years, as well as the characteristics of the clinical picture and allergens involved. METHODS: This was a retrospective study, with analysis of medical records of patients attended at this service. The individuals included had a diagnostic hypothesis of allergic contact dermatitis to cosmetics and had previously been submitted to epicutaneous tests. RESULTS: A total of 1405 medical records were analyzed, 403 (28.7%) with suspected allergic contact dermatitis to cosmetics and 232 (16.5%) with confirmed diagnosis. Of these, 208 (89.7%) were women, and the age group most affected was 31 - 60 years. The most common locations were face in 195 cases (25.8%), cervical region in 116 (15.3%), and trunk in 96 (12.6%). The main allergens in the contact tests were toluene-sulfonamide-formaldehyde resin in 69 cases (29.7%), paraphenylenediamine in 54 (26.3%), Kathon CG® in 41 (20.7%), and fragrance-mix 1 in 29 (16.4%). In 154 (66.4%) of the 232 patients with a confirmed diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis to cosmetics it was possible to specify the cosmetic product responsible for the lesions. STUDY LIMITATIONS: The absence of some allergens considered important in the world as causes of allergic contact dermatitis, which are not readily accessible among us. CONCLUSIONS: The data of the analyzed population (predominance of young women), as well as the location of the lesions (face and cervical area) and the main allergens involved were consistent with those from the world literature.

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)

Asunto(s)