Literature DB >> 9667445

Contact sensitization in chronic venous insufficiency: modern wound dressings.

G Gallenkemper1, E Rabe, R Bauer.   

Abstract

Patch tests with an expanded European standard series and 20 different wound dressings revealed sensitization in 78% of all (36) patients. The charts of allergens were headed by ointment bases (wool wax alcohols sensitization in 33% of all patients; Amerchol L-101 19.4%; cetearyl alcohol 13.9%; propylene glycol 8.3%), followed by plant resins/ethereal oils (balsam of Peru 22.2%; colophony 13.9%, fragrance mix 8.3%; propolis 5.6%) and topical antibiotics (neomycin sulfate 16.7%, chloramphenicol 13.9%), while usually common sensitizers like metal salts were not found as often (nickel sulfate 16.7%; potassium dichromate 13.9%; cobalt chloride 5.6%). Sensitization to modern wound dressings was found in 8.3% (3 cases) and was caused by propylene glycol as an ingredient of hydrogels; no sensitization was found to hydrocolloids, alginates or polyurethane foams. The overall sensitization rate in 2nd degree CVI was nearly as high as in 3rd degree CVI, but sensitization to ointments, their additives and topical antibiotics was significantly higher in 3rd degree CVI. Significant differences in sensitization frequencies to individual allergens were found between male and female patients. Our investigation points out the high risk of sensitization in 2nd as well as 3rd degree CVI, especially to ointment bases and active principles of topical drugs. Even wound dressings may cause allergic contact reactions.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9667445     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1998.tb05742.x

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


  7 in total

1.  [Patch testing in patients with leg ulcers with special regard to modern wound products].

Authors:  S Reich-Schupke; J Kurscheidt; C Appelhans; A Kreuter; P Altmeyer; M Stücker
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2010-07       Impact factor: 0.751

2.  [Allergic contact dermatitis from a hydrocolloid dressing due to colophony sensitization].

Authors:  A Körber; S Kohaus; M Geisheimer; S Grabbe; J Dissemond
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2006-03       Impact factor: 0.751

3.  [Contact allergies in patients with chronic wounds: results of a study from 1999 to 2004].

Authors:  M Lehnen; S Kohaus; A Körber; U Hillen; S Grabbe; J Dissemond
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2006-04       Impact factor: 0.751

4.  [A new topically applied morphine gel for the pain treatment in patients with chronic leg ulcers: first results of a clinical investigation].

Authors:  L Huptas; N Rompoti; S Herbig; A Körber; J Klode; D Schadendorf; J Dissemond
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2011-04       Impact factor: 0.751

5.  Hypersensitivity reactions to non beta-lactam antimicrobial agents, a statement of the WAO special committee on drug allergy.

Authors:  Mario Sánchez-Borges; Bernard Thong; Miguel Blanca; Luis Felipe Chiaverini Ensina; Sandra González-Díaz; Paul A Greenberger; Edgardo Jares; Young-Koo Jee; Luciana Kase-Tanno; David Khan; Jung-Won Park; Werner Pichler; Antonino Romano; Maria José Torres Jaén
Journal:  World Allergy Organ J       Date:  2013-10-31       Impact factor: 4.084

6.  Venous leg ulcers: Pathophysiology and Classification.

Authors:  Biju Vasudevan
Journal:  Indian Dermatol Online J       Date:  2014-07

7.  Reaction or infection: topical chloramphenicol treatment.

Authors:  R J Livingston; J W Butterworth; P Belt
Journal:  Ann R Coll Surg Engl       Date:  2013-01       Impact factor: 1.951

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.