Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

T Estlander

Publications and source records attributed to T Estlander.

At least 73 records · Page 4Linked to original sources
PubMed1997

Hand dermatitis and allergic patch test reactions caused by nickel in electroplaters.

A worksite survey was conducted in all 38 Finnish electroplating plants. All workers (n = 163) who worked with nickel plating (bath workers, hangers and solution makers) were interviewed with a questionnaire about symptoms of nickel dermatitis, hand dermatitis, and about protective measures, atopy, etc. Patch testing with nickel sulfate was done with the TRUE TestTM method. All the workers, 94 men and 69 women, answered the questionnaire. The mean age of women was 41.1 years, and of men 43.1 years, respectively. Men had longer occupational exposure to nickel (14 years) than women (10 years). Most workers used protective gloves. 35% of women and 30% of men reported present or past hand dermatosis. 19% reported a history of atopic dermatitis. 15% of women (n = 8) and 4% (n = 2) of men had an allergic patch test reaction to nickel sulfate. 70% of those with an allergic patch test reaction to nickel reported past or present hand eczema. The prevalence of nickel allergy among the electroplaters was similar to that of patients in patch test clinics in Finland. An allergic patch test reaction to nickel sulfate does not necessarily oblige an electroplater to change jobs.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Delayed and immediate allergy caused by methylhexahydrophthalic anhydride.

Epoxy resin compounds (ERC) include a large number of chemicals, such as epoxy resins (ER), reactive diluents and hardeners. Many hardeners, e.g., aliphatic polyamines, are well-known sensitizers. Another type of ER hardeners are the phthalic anhydrides, such as methylhexahydrophthalic anhydride (MHHPA) and methyltetrahydrophthalic anhydride (MTHPA), which have been reported as causing immunologically-mediated respiratory diseases and contact urticaria, but not allergic contact dermatitis. Here, we present a horizontal boring-machine worker who developed allergic contact dermatitis, as well as allergic rhinitis and an immediate contact skin reaction from MHHPA. Patch testing with a dilution series of MHHPA in pet. elicited the following results: 2%, 1% and 0.5%, +2; 0.25% and 0.125%, + (3- to 6-day readings). An immunohistochemical and electron microscopic study also indicated that the patch test reactions were conventional-delayed allergic reactions. Interleukin 8 was observed in the epidermal cells, whereas interleukin 4 immunoreactivity was detected in the dermal cells. Immunoreactivity to-interleukin 5, granulocyte/macrophage-colophony stimulating factor (GM-CSF) or eosinophil cationic protein was not seen. In conclusion, the patient developed both Type I and Type IV allergy to MHHPA. The clinical data, patch test results, immunohistochemical and electron microscopic observations indicated that the MHHPA allergy detected by the patch test reaction was a conventional delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction. The patient also had an allergic patch test reaction to para-phenylenediamine and diaminodiphenylmethane, possibly representing occupational sensitization.

Allergens↗
PubMed1997

10 years of patch testing with the (meth)acrylate series.

Statistics on 10 years of patch testing with 30 (meth)acrylates were compiled. Altogether 275 patients were patch tested and 48 patients (17.5%) had an allergic reaction to at least 1 (meth)acrylate. The (meth)acrylates most often provoking an allergic patch test reaction were 2-hydroxyethyl acrylate (2-HEA; 12.1%), 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate (2-HPMA; 12.0%) and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2-HEMA; 11.4%). No allergic reactions were caused by 2-ethylhexyl acrylate (2-EHA), 2,2-bis[4-(methacryloxy)phenyl]propane (BIS-MA), trimethylolpropane triacrylate (TMPTA), oligotriacrylate 480 (OTA 480), N,N-methylenebisacrylamide (MBAA), or ethyl cyanoacrylate (ECA). The frequency of allergic patch test reactions presented cannot be considered as a "ranking" list of the most sensitizing (meth)acrylate compounds. In order to be able to judge the sensitization capacity of various (meth)acrylate compounds in humans, it would be necessary to have detailed information on the exposure history of the patients studied, including the purity of the (meth)acrylate compounds. Currently, this is not possible because (meth)acrylate-containing products regularly contain undeclared (meth)acrylate compounds.

Allergens↗
PubMed1997

Rhinitis caused by ninhydrin develops into occupational asthma.

Ninhydrin (2,2-dihydroxy-1,3-indanedione or 1,2,3-triketo-hydrindene hydrate) is a chemical used in the detection of free amino and carboxyl groups in proteins and peptides. Allergic, immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated rhinitis caused by ninhydrin was diagnosed earlier in a 41 yr old woman working as a laboratory technician in a forensic laboratory. Despite handling ninhydrin only in a flow cabinet, symptoms of dyspnoea developed 6 months later. Peak flow was found to vary by 20% during working days. In the specific inhalation challenge it was shown that occupational asthma had also developed due to continuing slight exposure to ninhydrin. The titre of ninhydrin-specific IgE also increased from 0.6 to 1.1 kU x L(-1) in the follow-up. This case stresses the importance of cessation of allergen exposure in occupational allergic rhinitis, in order to prevent asthma.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Occupational asthma caused by triglycidyl isocyanurate (TGIC).

BACKGROUND: Polyester powder paints are extensively used in metal painting. Triglycidyl isocyanurate (TGIC), an epoxy compound, is often used as a hardener. Several cases of allergic eczema from occupational exposure to TGIC have been reported in the literature. OBJECTIVE: We examined a 36-year-old non-smoking man who worked mainly as a spray painter, using a polyester powder paint containing 4% TGIC. During painting he used protective clothing and a motorized breathing protector. After 4 years he developed eczema on his hands, face and body, and an occupational allergic eczema caused by TGIC was diagnosed. He also suffered from powder-paint-related asthmatic symptoms. METHODS: Occupational asthma was diagnosed in accordance with the accepted guidelines. Inhalation challenge tests were performed with the paint and TGIC. RESULTS: Spirometry showed slight obstruction; the blood eosinophils and serum IgE value were elevated. Skin-prick tests with common environmental allergens were negative. The challenge test with lactose powder was also negative. A challenge test with a paint containing TGIC (4%) induced a dual reaction in PEF and a late 23% fall in FEV1. A test with TGIC (4%) mixed with lactose induced a dual PEF reaction, and also dual changes in spirometry. The PD15 in the histamine challenge test decreased significantly after the challenge tests. CONCLUSIONS: To our knowledge this is the first diagnosed case of occupational asthma caused by TGIC. This case report emphasizes the importance of protecting both the skin and respiratory tract of workers against chemicals such as TGIC, capable of causing skin and respiratory allergy.

Adult↗
PubMed1997

Immediate and delayed skin allergy from cow dander.

BACKGROUND: Cow dander is the most common cause of occupational contact urticaria in Finland. Occasionally cow dander also causes allergic contact dermatitis, which can be revealed by patch testing with cow dander. OBJECTIVE: A patient with a combined type I and type IV allergy to cow dander is the subject of this report. RESULTS: She had intense pruritus, whealing, and severe dermatitis, but no respiratory symptoms. Skin tests and radioallergosorbent test indicated that she had both type I and type IV allergy to cow dander. CONCLUSION: Increasing numbers of cases with both type I and type IV allergy are reported, but the mechanism is not clear. In our clinic, we classify immediate reactions as contact urticaria if the clinical picture involves whealing, and as protein contact dermatitis if dermatitis dominates the clinical picture. If delayed allergic patch test results are obtained, we consider it allergic contact dermatitis.

Allergens↗
PubMed1996

Occupational laryngitis with immediate allergic or immediate type specific chemical hypersensitivity.

Reports of allergic laryngitis are sparse. In some reports allergy has been mentioned as an aetiological factor, but the diagnosis has not been confirmed with provocation tests. This paper reports on 20 patients in order to show that laryngitis can be caused by organic substances and chemicals with mechanisms of immediate allergy or immediate type specific hypersensitivity. The agents in the former group consisted of flours, obeche, plants and acid anhydrides, whereas these in the latter group included chemicals like formaldehyde, acrylate compounds, and chemicals used in hairdressing. All the cases were confirmed with provocation tests in which the patients displayed a change in vocal cord status. Thirteen patients had positive skin-prick test results with suspected causative agents. Eleven of these 13 patients had an elevated level of specific IgE-antibodies to the same agents.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by 2,4,6-tris-(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol, and review of sensitizing epoxy resin hardeners.

BACKGROUND: Epoxy resin compounds (ERC) include a large number of sensitizing chemicals such as epoxy resins (ER), hardeners (curing agents), and reactive diluents. Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by ERCS is often occupational. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We report a patient, sensitized to a hardener of a two-component epoxy paint. Three conventional patch test sessions were performed to diagnose the causative chemical. We also review the literature on sensitizing epoxy-resin hardeners. RESULTS: A 47-year-old nonatopic woman developed dermatitis from a two-component epoxy paint. Patch testing with epoxy resin was negative, but 2,4,6-tris(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol (tris-DMP), used in the paint hardener, induced an allergic patch test reaction. We also review briefly other epoxy hardeners that have caused allergic dermatitis, including: (1) aliphatic polyamines, e.g., ethylenediamine, diethylenetriamine, triethylenetetramine, 3-dimethylaminopropylamine, and trimethylhexamethylenediamine; (2) cycloaliphatic polyamines, e.g., isophoronediamine and 3,3'-dimethyl-4,4-diaminodicyclohexylmethane; (3) aromatic amines, such as 4,4'-diaminodiphenylmethane, m-phenylene diamine, and 1,3-xylylene diamine; (4) dicyanodiamide; (5) triglycidyl isocyanurate, an epoxy compound that may be used as an epoxy-resin hardener; and (6) additives in epoxy accelerators, such as hexavalent chromate. CONCLUSIONS: No one chemical can be used to screen for sensitization to the many different epoxy hardeners. Extensive patch testing may be required to reveal the hardener that has caused the allergy. The hardener, 2,4,6-tris-(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol (tris-DMP), is a new sensitizer. To verify ACD caused by tris-DMP, patch-testing at 1% in petrolatum is suggested.

Dermatitis, Allergic Contact↗
PubMed1996

Occupational conjunctivitis associated with type IV allergy to methacrylates.

On rare occasions, exposure to methacrylates (MAs) may induce mucosal symptoms. Three patients, two dental laboratory workers and one hearing aid laboratory worker, are presented. All three had allergic contact dermatitis from MAs which disappeared after avoidance of contact with uncured MA compounds. Two of the patients, the dental laboratory assistant and the hearing aid worker, had also developed symptoms of conjunctivitis. Both were exposed to chemically curable and light-curable MAs. The association between their conjunctivitis and type IV allergy to MAs was supported by the following observations: 1) sensitization to several MAs including methylMA, 2-hydroxyethylMA, ethyleneglycol diMA, triethyleneglycoldiMA, tetrahydrofurfuryldiMA, and 1,4-butanedioldiMA, as well as to pentaerythritol triacrylate; 2) simultaneous appearance of their eye symptoms and allergic contact dermatitis; 3) high exposure to MAs because of disturbances of ventilation; 4) disappearance of the eye symptoms during holidays; and 5) opthalmologist's findings of follicular conjunctivitis with some papillae, eosinophilia, and lymphocytosis in conjunctival scrapings corresponding to allergic contact conjunctivitis. In addition, the activation of eosinophils in the conjunctival scrapings was demonstrated with the monoclonal antibody technique, and an elevated level of eosinophilic cationic protein was found in the tear fluid. Our cases suggest that conjunctivitis may be caused by type IV allergy to MAs, although type I allergy (even though prick tests were negative), other hypersensitivity mechanisms, or irritation cannot be excluded. 4H-Gloves seem to give adequate hand protection even to allergic patients. More attention should be paid to ventilation systems if MA exposure occurs. In some cases, patients with eye symptoms need to be patch tested.

Conjunctivitis, Allergic↗
PubMed1996

Occupational IgE-mediated rhinitis caused by ninhydrin.

Ninhydrin is a laboratory chemical used as a reagent in the detection of free amino and carboxyl groups in proteins and peptides. We present the case of a laboratory technician who developed symptoms of rhinitis when handling papers immersed in a solution containing ninhydrin. Prick tests for ninhydrin and ninhydrin RAST were positive. The inhalation provocation test in an exposure chamber gave an immediate nasal response. A positive prick test to ninhydrin, an elevated level of specific IgE antibodies to ninhydrin, and the RAST inhibition test confirmed an IgE-mediated type I allergic reaction. We are not aware of any other report of ninhydrin as a cause of IgE-mediated allergy.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Allergic patch test reactions caused by the rubber chemical cyclohexyl thiophthalimide.

Rubber chemicals are among the most common occupational contact sensitizers. The most common rubber sensitizers are thiurams, thiazoles, carbamates and paraphenylenediamine derivatives. Here we present data on a less-well-known rubber chemical, N-(cyclohexylthio)phthalimide (CTP; CAS 17796-82-6). This chemical is currently the most widely used vulcanization retarder, but data on allergic contact dermatitis caused by CTP are lacking. We conducted a survey of 310 patients who had been patch tested with 30 rubber chemicals including CTP. 11 (3.5%) showed an allergic patch test reaction provoked by CTP, and 9.0% by thiurams. 4 of the patients reacted only to CTP and not to other rubber chemicals, whereas the other 7 concomitantly reacted to other rubber chemicals. After analyzing the patch test data of these 11 patients, it was concluded that CTP probably did not cross-react with the other rubber chemicals. Therefore the patch test results may indicate independent sensitization to CTP and other rubber chemicals. Because very little data on the components of rubber chemicals in rubber products are available, the source of the putative sensitization to the rubber vulcanization retarder CTP is unknown.

Cross Reactions↗