Literature DB >> 12942188

[Epidemiologic surveillance of contact allergens. The "monitoring series" of IVDK (Information Network ofDermatologic Clinics for Detection and Scientific Evaluation of Contact Allergy].

W Aberer1, P Komericki, W Uter, B M Hausen, H Lessmann, B Kränke, J Geier, A Schnuch.   

Abstract

The selection of the most important contact allergens is subject to a continuous change. Several factors may influence the sensitization rates and thus the decision, which substances to include in the standard series of the most frequent allergens. The Information Network of Departments of Dermatology adds substances of interest for a certain time period to the standard series in order to evaluate parameters such as sensitization rate, grade of reaction, and clinical relevance of positive reactions. In 6 testing periods starting in 1996, 13 test substances were evaluated. Due to the results, propolis, compositae mix, and bufexamac were included in the standard series in 1999, while lyral was added in 2002. Sorbitansesquioleat, dispers blue mix, and iodopropynyl butylcarbamate are under further discussion. Substances such as glutaraldehyde and p-aminoazobenzole should be tested in certain risk groups only, whereas the steroids budesonide and tixocortol should be tested when clinically suspected.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12942188     DOI: 10.1007/s00105-003-0544-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hautarzt        ISSN: 0017-8470            Impact factor:   0.751


  28 in total

1.  Sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of patch testing: the more you test, the more you get? ESCD Working Party on Epidemiology.

Authors:  T L Diepgen; P J Coenraads
Journal:  Contact Dermatitis       Date:  2000-06       Impact factor: 6.600

2.  [Information Society of Dermatological Clinics. Clinical epidemiology for prevention of allergic contact eczema].

Authors:  A Schnuch; J Geier; W Uter
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 0.751

3.  Occupational contact dermatitis from propolis.

Authors:  Rainer Henschel; Monika Agathos; Reinhard Breit
Journal:  Contact Dermatitis       Date:  2002-07       Impact factor: 6.600

4.  The reaction index: a parameter to assess the quality of patch test preparations.

Authors:  J Brasch; T Henseler
Journal:  Contact Dermatitis       Date:  1992-09       Impact factor: 6.600

Review 5.  Proposal for a revised international standard series of patch tests.

Authors:  J M Lachapelle; S I Ale; S Freeman; P J Frosch; C L Goh; M Hannuksela; R Hayakawa; H I Maibach; J E Wahlberg
Journal:  Contact Dermatitis       Date:  1997-03       Impact factor: 6.600

6.  The preservative iodopropynyl butylcarbamate: frequency of allergic reactions and diagnostic considerations.

Authors:  A Schnuch; J Geier; J Brasch; W Uter
Journal:  Contact Dermatitis       Date:  2002-03       Impact factor: 6.600

Review 7.  Propolis allergy. (I). Origin, properties, usage and literature review.

Authors:  B M Hausen; E Wollenweber; H Senff; B Post
Journal:  Contact Dermatitis       Date:  1987-09       Impact factor: 6.600

8.  Thoughts on sensitizers in a standard patch test series. The European Society of Contact Dermatitis.

Authors:  M Bruze; L Condé-Salazar; A Goossens; L Kanerva; I R White
Journal:  Contact Dermatitis       Date:  1999-11       Impact factor: 6.600

Review 9.  Iodopropynyl butylcarbamate.

Authors:  Sonia Badreshia; James G Marks
Journal:  Am J Contact Dermat       Date:  2002-06

10.  The sensitizing potential of various biocides in the guinea pig maximization test.

Authors:  Danièle Zissu
Journal:  Contact Dermatitis       Date:  2002-04       Impact factor: 6.600

View more
  1 in total

1.  [Anal and palmar contact dermatitis caused by iodopropynyl butylcarbamate in moist sanitary wipes].

Authors:  R Schöllnast; B Kränke; W Aberer
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2003-10       Impact factor: 0.751

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.