Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

R Jolanki

Publications and source records attributed to R Jolanki.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
PubMed2001

A multicenter study of patch test reactions with dental screening series.

BACKGROUND: Dental products contain many allergens, and may cause problems both for patients undergoing dental treatment and for dental personnel because of occupational exposure. Individual patch test clinics may not study sufficient numbers of patients to collect reliable data on uncommon allergens. OBJECTIVE: To collect information on dental allergens based on a multicenter study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Finnish Contact Dermatitis Group tested more than 4,000 patients (for most allergens, 2,300 to 2,600 patients) with dental screening series. Conventional patch testing was performed. The total number and percentage of irritant (scored as irritant [IR] or doubtful [?]) and allergic (scored as +, ++, or +++) patch test reactions, respectively, were calculated, as well as the highest and lowest percentage of allergic patch test reactions recorded by the different patch test clinics. A reaction index (RI) was calculated, giving information on the irritancy of the patch test substances. RESULTS: The most frequent allergic patch test reactions were caused by nickel (14.6%), ammoniated mercury (13%), mercury (10.3%), gold (7.7%), benzoic acid (4.3%), palladium (4.2%) and cobalt (4.1%). 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2.8%) provoked most of the reactions caused by (meth)acrylates. Menthol, peppermint oil, ammonium tetrachloroplatinate, and amalgam alloying metals provoked no (neither allergic nor irritant) patch test reactions. CONCLUSION: Patch testing with allergens in the dental screening series, including (meth)acrylates and mercury, needs to be performed to detect contact allergy to dental products.

Allergens↗
PubMed2000

Metals and arsenic in eye shadows.

The regulations relating to cosmetic products give no limit values for toxic elements such as metals or arsenic occurring as impurities in cosmetic products. The present study of metals (lead, cobalt, nickel, chromium) and arsenic in eye shadows in 88 colors of 25 brands and 49 products provides a basis for assessing the safety of eye shadow. 66 out of 88 (75%) of the colors contained more than 5 ppm of at least one of the elements, and all 49 products contained more than one 1 ppm of at least 1 of the elements. In one color, the amount of all elements was less than 1 ppm. The highest levels of cobalt and nickel were 41 and 49 ppm, respectively. These levels were high enough to cause allergic symptoms in those previously sensitized. Furthermore, long-term exposure to such levels may probably sensitize. The concentrations of arsenic were extremely low, 2.3 ppm at most. The level of lead was less than 20 ppm in all products. Accordingly, the concentrations of arsenic and lead seemed to be safe. 9 colors had concentrations of water-soluble chromium exceeding 2 ppm, and a very high level, 318 ppm, was encountered in 1 case. The overall results indicate that eye-shadows probably have no significant systemic toxicological effects. The groups at greatest risk are those already sensitized to the allergenic elements. Such consumers will have difficulties in choosing suitable products, since these elements in the form of impurities are not declared in the list of ingredients. Manufacturers should demand certification that the raw materials they buy contain no toxic elements. Although some of the products studied were acceptable, many had excessive levels of the elements from the consumer's viewpoint.

Arsenic↗
PubMed2000

Incidence rates of occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by metals.

BACKGROUND: Data on the incidence rates (IR) of occupational dermatoses are scarce. MATERIAL AND METHODS: We calculated the IR of occupational allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by chromium, nickel and cobalt by occupation, during a 7-year period (1991-1997) from the data of the Finnish Register of Occupational Diseases and from the statistics on the working population in different occupations. RESULTS: A total of 2543 cases of occupational ACD were reported during 1991-1997. Cr caused 143 (5.6%) cases of ACD, Ni 176 cases (6.9%) and Co 41 cases (1.6%) of ACD. Women had greater number of occupational ACD from nickel, whereas occupational ACD from chromate and cobalt was more frequent in men. The ranking list of the IR of occupational ACD caused by Cr per 10,000 working years was (incidence rate in parenthesis) (1) tanners, fellmongers, and pelt dressers (12.20); (2) cast concrete product workers (6.94); (3) leather goods workers (4.71), (4) metal plating and coating workers (3.66); (5) bricklayers (3.44); (6) reinforcement concreters (2.79); and (7) building workers (1.32). The corresponding ranking list for Ni was (1) footwear workers (2.55); (2) machine and metal product assemblers (2.40); (3) electrical and teletechnical equipment assemblers (2.03); (4) precision instrument mechanics (1.73); (5) postal officials (1.48); (6) hairdressers, beauticians, and bath attendants (1.24); (7) industrial tailors and seamstresses (1.08); and (8) waiters in cafes and snack bars (1.04). The corresponding ranking list for Co was (1) printers (0.80); (2) turners, machinists, and toolmakers (0.36); and (3) machine and engine mechanics (0.17). CONCLUSION: The Finnish Register of Occupational Diseases forms a good basis for calculating IR. As IR illustrates the risk to become sensitized, preventive measures should be directed at occupations with the highest IR.

Chromium↗
PubMed2000

Airborne occupational allergic contact dermatitis from triglycidyl-p-aminophenol and tetraglycidyl-4,4'-methylene dianiline in preimpregnated epoxy products in the aircraft industry.

BACKGROUND: Very little is known about allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) from preimpregnated epoxy products (prepregs). OBJECTIVE: To describe a patient with occupational ACD from prepregs, and report new quantitative data on the content of prepregs. METHODS AND RESULTS: A laminator developed work-related vesicular hand dermatitis. He worked in an aircraft plant assembling aircraft parts, being exposed to preimpregnated carbon fiber and fiberglass sheets (prepregs), and epoxy adhesive tapes and foams. Triglycidyl-p-aminophenol (TGPAP; 1-0.25%, 2+; 0.05%, 1+) and tetraglycidyl-4,4'-methylene dianiline (TGMDA; 1%, 3+; 0.5-0.05%, 2+) provoked allergic patch test reactions, whereas o-diglycidyl phthalate was negative (1-0.05% pet) and standard epoxy provoked a weak (?+) reaction. Six prepreg products provoking allergic patch test reactions were analyzed for their TGPAP, TGMDA and diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A (DGEBA) content using gas and liquid chromatographic methods, showing up to 10% of TGPAP, 19% of TGMDA and 5% of DGEBA in the prepregs. An epoxy primer contained 61% of TGPAP. CONCLUSION: TGPAP and TGMDA caused occupational ACD. These chemicals need to be used when patch testing patients are exposed to prepregs, because patch testing with DGEBA may be negative.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Occupational allergic airbone contact dermatitis and delayed bronchial asthma from epoxy resin revealed by bronchial provocation test.

Diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A (DGEBA) epoxy resins belong to the most common causes of occupational allergic contact dermatitis. DGEBA has on rare occasions caused occupational asthma. Here we present a patient who first developed occupational allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by a single accidental exposure to DGEBA. Then, on continued occupational exposure to DGEBA, the patient developed occupational asthma from DGEBA, in addition to ACD. A bronchial provocation test with DGEBA caused a 36% drop in the peak expiratory flow, reflecting a delayed type of occupational asthma. This bronchial provocation test caused a strong dermatitis of the exposed skin of the face, in accordance with airborne ACD from DGEBA.

Adult↗
PubMed1999

Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from unsaturated polyester resin in a car repair putty.

BACKGROUND: Unsaturated polyester (UP) resins are widely used as cements in car repair painting to produce a smooth surface before the final painting. We report two car painters with hand and face dermatitis who were sensitized to a UP resin used for car repair cements. METHODS: Patch testing with commercial substances and ingredients and extracts from UP resins was used to verify the sensitivity. RESULTS: Both patients showed an allergic patch test reaction to a UP resin. They also had an allergic patch test reaction to diethyleneglycol maleate (DEGM), an extract of a UP resin. CONCLUSIONS: Both patients had been patch tested elsewhere with negative results because UP resins had not been used for patch testing. Accordingly, patients with dermatitis who have been exposed to UP resins need to be patch tested with UP resins. The specific chemical causing allergic contact dermatitis in our patients was DEGM.

Automobiles↗
PubMed1999

Patch-test reactions to plastic and glue allergens.

Plastics and glues are common causes of occupational dermatoses, but only few reports have dealt with patch-test reactions caused by plastic and glue allergens. Patients exposed to plastics and remitted to an occupational dermatology clinic, were patch-tested with 50-53 plastic and glue allergens during a 6-year period. Conventional patch-test techniques were used. The most common causes of allergic patch-test reactions in 360 patients were novolac epoxy resin (5.1%), phenol formaldehyde resin (3.1%), 4-tert-butylcatechol (2.6%), phenyl glycidyl ether (2.6%), diaminodiphenyl methane (2.2%), benzoyl peroxide (2.2%), hexamethylene tetramine (2.0%) and o-cresyl glycidyl ether (1.6%). The allergens that most often elicited irritant patch-test reactions were: benzoyl peroxide (9.5%), abitol alcohol (3.6%), hydroquinone (3.1%), acid-catalyzed phenol formaldehyde resin (2.5%) and toluene diisocyanate (1.9%). Twenty-six out of 53 chemicals caused no allergic reaction during the 6-year period. Plastic allergens in the standard series provoked allergic reactions with formaldehyde (5.8%), diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A (3.2%), 4-tert-butylphenol-formaldehyde-resin (1.1%), toluene sulphonamide formaldehyde-resin (1.1%) and triethylenglycol diacrylate (0.4%). Although half of the plastic chemicals gave no allergic patch-test reactions during a 6-year period, with unusual allergens this low yield needs to be accepted, because otherwise rare allergies will not be detected. Also a negative reaction has diagnostic value.

Acrylic Resins↗