Literature DB >> 16112346

Patch test results from the Mayo Clinic Contact Dermatitis Group, 1998-2000.

David A Wetter1, Mark D P Davis, James A Yiannias, Janet F Cheng, Suzanne M Connolly, Rokea A el-Azhary, Sara A Farmer, Debra D Fett, Janis S Johnson, Diane L Nordberg Linehan, Donna M Richardson, Arnold L Schroeter.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Patch testing is a diagnostic tool for the evaluation of patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis. A standard series of allergens similar to that used by the North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) is used at Mayo Clinic.
OBJECTIVE: Our aim was to report the results of patch testing with a standard series at Mayo Clinic from July 1, 1998, to Dec 31, 2000 and to compare our findings with those of the NACDG during the same period.
METHODS: The results of patch testing with the standard series at Mayo Clinic were examined. Positive reaction rates were compared between Mayo Clinic and the NACDG.
RESULTS: During the 30-month period, 1324 Mayo Clinic patients were patch tested with a standard series of allergens (mean, 60 allergens), whereas the NACDG standard series during this period included 50 allergens. Overall, 917 patients (69.3%) had at least one positive reaction and 606 patients (45.8%) had two or more positive reactions. The 10 allergens used both by Mayo Clinic and by the NACDG that most frequently caused positive reactions were nickel sulfate hexahydrate, balsam of Peru (Myroxylon pereirae), neomycin sulfate, cobalt chloride, fragrance mix, potassium dichromate (0.25%), thimerosal, bacitracin, formaldehyde, and glutaraldehyde. Statistically significant differences in positive reaction rates (P < .05) were observed for 12 of the 43 allergens common to both Mayo Clinic and the NACDG.
CONCLUSION: With large standard patch test series, one can identify commonly encountered and potentially relevant contact allergens.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16112346     DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2005.04.077

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol        ISSN: 0190-9622            Impact factor:   11.527


  6 in total

Review 1.  Allergic Contact Dermatitis Evaluation: Strategies for the Preschooler.

Authors:  Calvin T Sung; Maria A McGowan; Sharon E Jacob
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2018-08-01       Impact factor: 4.806

2.  Contact allergens in a pediatric population: association with atopic dermatitis and comparison with other north american referral centers.

Authors:  Sharon E Jacob; Aparche Yang; Elise Herro; Chi Zhang
Journal:  J Clin Aesthet Dermatol       Date:  2010-10

3.  Differential immunotoxic effects of inorganic and organic mercury species in vitro.

Authors:  Renee M Gardner; Jennifer F Nyland; Ellen K Silbergeld
Journal:  Toxicol Lett       Date:  2010-06-26       Impact factor: 4.372

Review 4.  Allergic Reactions to Dental Materials-A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Meena Syed; Radhika Chopra; Vinod Sachdev
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2015-10-01

5.  A perspective on the safety of parabens as preservatives in wound care products.

Authors:  Eveline Torfs; Gilles Brackman
Journal:  Int Wound J       Date:  2020-11-25       Impact factor: 3.315

6.  Comparison of European Standard Patch Test Results of 330 Patients from an Occupational Diseases Hospital.

Authors:  Özge Gündüz; Aslı Aytekin; Engin Tutkun; Hınç Yılmaz
Journal:  Dermatol Res Pract       Date:  2016-10-11
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.