Literature DB >> 23336843

Two decades of occupational (meth)acrylate patch test results and focus on isobornyl acrylate.

Wietske A Christoffers1, Pieter-Jan Coenraads, Marie-Louise A Schuttelaar.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Acrylates constitute an important cause of occupational contact dermatitis. Isobornyl acrylate sensitization has been reported in only 2 cases. We encountered an industrial process operator with occupational contact dermatitis caused by isobornyl acrylate.
OBJECTIVES: (i) To investigate whether it is relevant to add isobornyl acrylate to the (meth)acrylate test series. (ii) To report patients with (meth)acrylate contact allergy at an occupational dermatology clinic. PATIENTS/MATERIALS/
METHODS: Our patch test database was screened for positive reactions to (meth)acrylates between 1993 and 2012. A selected group of 14 patients was tested with an isobornyl acrylate dilution series: 0.3%, 0.1%, 0.033%, and 0.01%. Readings were performed on D2, D3, and D7.
RESULTS: One hundred and fifty-one patients were tested with our (meth)acrylate series; 24 had positive reactions. Most positive reactions were to 2-hydroxypropyl acrylate, 2-hydroxyethyl acrylate, 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate, and diethyleneglycol diacrylate. Hypothetical screening with 2-hydroxypropyl acrylate, ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate, ethoxylated bisphenol A glycol dimethacrylate and trimethylolpropane triacrylate identified 91.7% of the 24 patients. No positive reactions were observed in 14 acrylate-positive patients tested with the isobornyl acrylate dilution series. The 0.3% isobornyl acrylate concentration induced irritant reactions in 3 patients.
CONCLUSIONS: We report a rare case of allergic contact dermatitis caused by isobornyl acrylate. However, this study provides insufficient support for isobornyl acrylate to be added to a (meth)acrylate series.
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Entities:  

Keywords:  acrylate; allergic contact dermatitis; isobornyl acrylate; occupational

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23336843     DOI: 10.1111/cod.12023

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contact Dermatitis        ISSN: 0105-1873            Impact factor:   6.600


  6 in total

1.  Adhesives Used for Diabetes Medical Devices: A Neglected Risk With Serious Consequences?

Authors:  Lutz Heinemann; Stefanie Kamann
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2016-11-01

Review 2.  Recent Trends in Occupational Contact Dermatitis.

Authors:  Marta Wiszniewska; Jolanta Walusiak-Skorupa
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2015-07       Impact factor: 4.806

3.  Cutaneous Reactions to Continuous Glucose Monitoring and Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Devices in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus.

Authors:  Rachel S Rigo; Laura E Levin; Donald V Belsito; Maria C Garzon; Rachelle Gandica; Kristen M Williams
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2020-05-09

4.  Further Evidence of Severe Allergic Contact Dermatitis From Isobornyl Acrylate While Using a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System.

Authors:  Stefanie Kamann; Olivier Aerts; Lutz Heinemann
Journal:  J Diabetes Sci Technol       Date:  2018-03-15

Review 5.  [Contact allergy due to insulin pumps and glucose sensor systems].

Authors:  N Wagner; S Kamann; E Oppel
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2020-03       Impact factor: 0.751

Review 6.  What Is New in Occupational Allergic Contact Dermatitis in the Year of the COVID Pandemic?

Authors:  Erica B Lee; Marissa Lobl; Aubree Ford; Vincent DeLeo; Brandon L Adler; Ashley Wysong
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2021-03-29       Impact factor: 4.806

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.