Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Patch Tests”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 253 records · Page 14Linked to original sources
PubMed1995

Patch test results with serial dilutions of nickel sulfate (with and without detergent), palladium chloride, and nickel and palladium metal plates.

Clinical experience suggests the existence of different degrees of sensitivity in nickel-allergic patients. For quantification of this phenomenon, 462 consecutive patients with previously diagnosed or strongly suspected nickel allergy were tested with serial dilution patch tests with 5 ppm to 5% nickel sulfate in pet. (Ni), and 5 ppm to 1% nickel sulfate in pet. with 1% detergent (Ni/D). Additionally, nickel and palladium metal plates were tested in 103, and cobalt salts, dichromate and palladium chloride (PdCl2) in most patients. 332 patients reacted positively to Ni or Ni/D. The influence of a concomitantly administered detergent was not significant. A significant correlation was found between positive reactions to low concentrations of Ni (or Ni/D), i.e., 0.1% or less (N = 166), and concomitant reactions to nickel metal plates, cobalt salts and PdCl2 and a history of ear piercing with metal intolerance. The clinical relevance of reactions to PdCl2 is at present not clear. A subgroup of nickel-allergic patients with "high sensitivity" can be defined. In future studies further addressing the clinical relevance of high versus low sensitivity, patch testing with 0.01, 0.1, 1.0 and 5% nickel sulfate in pet. is recommended instead of routine tests with 5% only.

Adult↗
PubMed1998

Formaldehyde concentration in diagnostic patch testing: comparison of 1% with 2%.

Exposure to formaldehyde is common from both consumer products and industry. The reliability of the patch test is essential for the diagnosis of formaldehyde allergy as it is difficult to suspect from the patient's history. The recommended formaldehyde patch test concentration has been reduced over the last decades from 4-5% to 2% and is currently 1%. The changes have not been based upon formal studies, but driven by an intention to reduce irritancy and false-positive results. The aim of the present study was prospectively to compare the outcome of simultaneous testing with formaldehyde 1% and 2% in consecutively patch-tested patients, with respect to frequency of positive patch test reactions, strength of patch test reactions to different formaldehyde test concentrations, irritancy and relevance. The study included 3734 consecutively patch tested patients. 121 gave a positive reaction to 1% and/or 2% formaldehyde in water. There was no statistically significant difference between 1 and 2% with respect to allergic reactions, but 2% gave significantly more irritant reactions. Doubtful, positive and follicular reactions at day (D) 2 frequently developed into true positive reactions at D 3 to 4. Reading at D 7 gave few additional positive cases compared to D 3/4. Problems related to relevance are discussed. Based on present knowledge, a 1% patch test concentration for formaldehyde is recommended.

Allergens↗
PubMed2004

Reproducibility of patch tests: comparison of identical test allergens from different commercial sources.

The reproducibility of patch tests is an important determinant of the clinical value of this diagnostic procedure. The aim of the present study was to delineate comparatively the efficiency and reproducibility of identical test reagents from 2 different commercial sources. Purchased in duplicate from brial and Boots-Hermal, 30 allergens from the European standard and an extension series were simultaneously applied to Finn Chambers and affixed next to each other. Out of 2070 paired patch tests in 71 patients, 97.2% presented with concordant-negative results. 60 patch tests were classified as allergic with 95% concordant-positive results. From these paired positive patches, a subgroup of 13 (22.8%) corresponding allergens presented with minor differences in the visible strength of the allergic reaction. Generated by cobalt chloride, formaldehyde and 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol in 1 patient each, discordant results, i.e. 1 positive and 1 negative test in parallel, were found in only 5%. Taken together, we were able to demonstrate that patch test preparations from 2 different companies exhibited a high level of reproducibility. This standardized quality of test reagents from different suppliers provides useful information on several aspects of everyday practice.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1996

Quantitative aspects of isoeugenol contact allergy assessed by use and patch tests.

The clinical implications of sensitization to the fragrance material isoeugenol were studied in 19 subjects. Patch testing with serial dilutions of isoeugenol and a repeated open application test (ROAT) were performed. The minimum effect level under patch test conditions was below 0.01% isoeugenol in 4/19 (20%) of the test subjects. The ROAT was performed with a test solution of 0.2% isoeugenol in ethanol, which is the recommended maximum concentration used in perfumes, ethanol being applied as vehicle control. 4 weeks was the maximum exposure period. The upper arm was used as test site the 1st 14 days and the upper arm as well as the neck for the next 14 days. 12/19 (63%) of test subjects had a positive ROAT. 4 of the responders (33%) reacted beyond day 7, but none after day 14. Use testing on the neck 14 days did not add any further ROAT-positive cases, compared with testing on the upper arm. The sensitivity found on patch testing may be a guidance for the outcome of use tests with the same compound. In this study, all subjects with a positive use test to isoeugenol 0.2% in ethanol also demonstrated on patch testing a minimum effect level of 0.2% or lower. Data from serial dilution patch and use tests may contribute significant information to assessment of the relationship between patch test responses and clinical contact hypersensitivity, and thus the safety of allergens used in cosmetics.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1997

Allergy to cocamidopropyl betaine may be due to amidoamine: a patch test and product use test study.

Cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) is an amphoteric surfactant commonly used in personal care products and surface cleaners. Patch testing with commercially-available CAPB has yielded occasional reactions indicative of allergic contact dermatitis. To determine if subjects with previous positive patch tests would react in provocative use tests of products containing CAPB, and to study various contaminants in commercial CAPB supplies for allergenicity in these subjects, 10 subjects previously positive to CAPB on patch testing used a hair shampoo, hand soap, and body wash containing CAPB for 1-6 weeks or until a reaction developed. Later, they were patch tested to 2 different purity grades of CAPB and 3 possible manufacturing contaminants (dimethylaminopropylamine, amidoamine, and sodium monochloroacetate). 7 of the 10 subjects developed dermatitis from 1 or more CAPB-containing products at some point during the study. 9 of the 10 use-test subjects were then patch tested, and 6 of these subjects showed a reaction to amidoamine (0.1% aq.). None reacted to dimethylaminopropylamine (0.1% pet.). 1 subject reacted to CAPB but not to amidoamine. In the follow-up patch testing with CAPB that was free of amidoamine, there were no positive reactions. Most subjects who were patch-test-positive showed a reaction when using CAPB-containing skin and hair care products. The chemical amidoamine, which is used in the synthesis of CAPB and which is a known contaminant of CAPB preparations, is likely to be the actual sensitizer in most cases rather than CAPB itself. The results do not rule out the possibility that CAPB itself may be an allergen in rare cases.

Acetates↗
PubMed2005

Low yield for extended reading of patch tests with topical corticosteroids.

BACKGROUND: On the basis of reports that up to 30% of patch test reactions are missed if an extended reading is not performed, we required that patients who were being patch tested with the corticosteroid series return for a reading at least 1 week after placement of the allergens. OBJECTIVE: To report our institutional experience with extended readings (day 7 or beyond) of patch test reactions to the corticosteroid series. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed patch test reactions to corticosteroids since extended readings were implemented (April 2001 to June 2004). RESULTS: A total of 135 patients were patch tested with 1,656 corticosteroid allergens. On day 5, five patients had five positive patch test reactions; by the time of the extended reading, no new reactions had developed in these patients. Of the patients with no reactions on day 5, two had a positive result at the extended reading: each had a relevant reaction to budesonide 0.1%, one on day 7 and the other on day 9. CONCLUSIONS: Only 2 reactions (to 1,656 corticosteroids) became apparent at the extended reading. Extended readings were of limited value in our experience.

Administration, Topical↗
PubMed1988

Patch testing with nickel sulphate under occlusion for five hours.

Routine patch testing is usually performed with the allergens under occlusion for 48 h, but a shorter occlusion time would of course be more convenient for the patient. In this study, nickel was chosen as the substance with which to investigate whether routine patch testing with allergen exposure for 5 h is possible. Patch testing, using dilutions of nickel sulphate under occlusion for 48 h and 5 h, was compared in 8 nickel-sensitive females. The results show that equivalent patch test reactions were achieved when using higher concentrations of the nickel solutions under occlusion for 5 h.

Female↗
PubMed1993

Long-lasting allergic patch test reaction caused by gold.

Allergic contact dermatitis caused by gold is rare, and only isolated cases have been reported. Patch testing with gold may cause a long-lasting reaction. The purpose of this study is to describe a well-studied case of gold allergy caused by dental gold crowns. A gold-sensitized patient and a non-sensitized control subject were examined using patch tests, immunohistochemistry, electron microscopy and blast transformation reactions. Sodium thiosulfate, auranofin and sodium thiomalate gave positive patch test reactions. Immunohistochemistry and electron microscopy were performed from biopsies taken from allergic patch test reactions caused by gold sodium thiosulfate 1 day and 17 days after applying the patches, from normal skin and from a 17-day-old allergic patch test reaction caused by ammonium persulfate. Down-regulation had taken place by 17 days in the allergic ammonium persulfate reaction, but not in the 17-day allergic gold test reaction. The patient reacted to all but one of the gold-induced blast transformation tests, sodium chloroaurate being non-inductive. The non-sensitized control subject did not exhibit any reactions. In conclusion, gold sodium thiosulfate, gold sodium thiomalate and auranofin can be used as patch test substances for gold allergy, though long-lasting allergic patch test reactions may develop. In vitro gold salt induced blast transformation is an alternative test for gold allergy. The slow down-regulation of the allergic patch test reactions needs to be studied further.

Crowns↗
PubMed1982

Patch testing with perfume mixture.

145 of 1116 patients patch tested with the standard series of the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group, including the recently introduced perfume mixture, had positive patch test reactions to at least one of the traditional screening agents for fragrance allergy or to the perfume mixture. In 96 of 145 patients the positive patch tests could be explained as being related to fragrance allergy. The perfume mixture was considered a useful screening agent for fragrance allergy. However, the results indicate that it is still necessary to employ several screening agents to detect this type of hypersensitivity.

Dermatitis, Contact↗
PubMed2000

Results of patch testing with lavender oil in Japan.

We report the annual results of patch testing with lavender oil for a 9-year period from 1990 to 1998 in Japan. Using Finn Chambers and Scanpor tape, we performed 2-day closed patch testing with lavender oil 20% pet. on the upper back of each patient suspected of having cosmetic contact dermatitis. We compared the frequency of positive patch tests to lavender oil each year with those to other fragrances. We diagnosed contact allergy when patch test reactions were + or <+ at 1 day after removal. The positivity rate of lavender oil was 3.7% (0-13.9%) during the 9-year period from 1990 to 1998. The positivity rate of lavender oil increased suddenly in 1997. Recently, in Japan, there has been a trend for aromatherapy using lavender oil. With this trend, placing dried lavender flowers in pillows, drawers, cabinets, or rooms has become a new fashion. We asked patients who showed a positive reaction to lavender oil about their use of dried lavender flowers. We confirmed the use of dried lavender flowers in 5 cases out of 11 positive cases in 1997 and 8 out of 15 positive cases in 1998. We concluded that the increase in patch test positivity rates to lavender oil in 1997 and 1998 was due to the above fashion, rather than due to fragrances in cosmetic products.

Adolescent↗
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↗
PubMed2003

Erythema multiforme due to contact with weeds: a recurrence after patch testing.

Erythema multiforme (EM) as a complication of patch testing (PT) is rare. A 52-year-old woman with a 13-year history of episodes of EM, after contact with weeds during home gardening, had had no recent history of herpes simplex, other infection, drug ingestion or vaccination. On examination, EM lesions were distributed on the exposed skin. 5 weeks after complete resolution, PT and photopatch testing (PPT) were done with fresh plants she brought in. She was PT with a standard series and the Hermal-Trolab plants, woods, tars, balsams and flavors series. Intradermal testing, with a 3 + reaction to mixed weed pollens, was done 3 weeks later. Specific IgE to weed pollens class 1 (CAP-Pharmacia) was detected. Eczematous PT reactions were obtained with fresh leaves: common chickweed (Stellaria media Caryophyllaceae), dandelion (Taraxacum officinale Compositae), field-milk thistle (Sonchus arvensis Compositae) and white clover (Trifolium repens Leguminosae). Photoaggravation was seen to common chickweed and dandelion. Positive PT was also seen with alantolactone. By the 4-day reading, a typical EM had commenced, coming up to quite the same extent as seen on admission. There was no photosensitivity (UV skin tester, K. Waldmann). In the essential oil obtained from common chickweed, thin layer chromatography (TLC) revealed the well-known contact allergens borneol, menthol, linalool, 1,8-cineole, and other terpenes such as epoxy-dehydro-caryophyllene, monoterpene alcohol-ester and caryophyllene. Up to now, no data on essential oil in Stellaria media (common chickweed) have been reported. It can be concluded that EM developed due to contact with weeds, and recurred after patch testing. Neither blistering nor eczematous lesions have been seen on her skin, making this case very unusual. As far as the world literature is concerned, this is only the 4th report of EM developing in association with patch testing.

Dermatitis, Occupational↗
PubMed1982

Cost benefit of patch testing with textile finish resins.

Eleven years experience of textile finish resin patch testing of suspected textile dermatitis patients revealed 15 cases of allergic textile dermatitis among 428 patients tested. Ten of the 15 patients had a relevant positive patch test to one or more of a limited series of textile finishes; 1 was negative and 4 were not tested with textile finishes. All 15 patients were formaldehyde sensitive. No unexpected, relevant, positive textile finish resin patch test was found. In this study a negative patch test to formaldehyde virtually excluded allergic contact dermatitis from textile finishes.

Cost-Benefit Analysis↗
PubMed2004

Pesticide patch test series for the assessment of allergic contact dermatitis among banana plantation workers in panama.

BACKGROUND: Irritant contact dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) are frequent among agricultural workers and require targeted interventions. Patch testing is necessary for differential diagnosis, but patch testing with pesticides is uncommon. OBJECTIVE: This study explores the frequency of ACD and sensitization to pesticides among highly exposed banana plantation workers. METHODS: Frequently and recently used pesticides on banana plantations in Divala, Panama, were documented. A pesticide patch test tray specific for this population was prepared. A structured interview was administered to 366 participants, followed by a complete skin examination. The pesticide patch test series, as well as a standard patch test series, was applied to 37 workers with dermatoses likely to be pesticide related and to 23 control workers without dermatoses. RESULTS: The pesticide patch tests identified 15 cases (41%) of ACD (20 positive reactions) among the 37 workers diagnosed with pesticide dermatosis. Three controls had allergic reactions to pesticides (4 positive reactions). The pesticides were carbaryl (5 cases), benomyl (4 cases), ethoprophos (3), chlorothalonil (2), imazalil (2), glyphosate (2), thiabendazole (2), chlorpyrifos (1), oxyfluorfen (1), propiconazole (1), and tridemorph (1). Ethoprophos and tridemorph had not been previously identified as sensitizers. Thus, the prevalence of ACD was 0.03 (15 of 366). On the basis of observed prevalences of positive patch-test reactions among the subgroups with and without dermatoses, we estimated that > or = 16% of the entire population may be sensitized to pesticides. CONCLUSION: Sensitization to pesticides among banana plantation workers is a frequent occupational health problem. Pesticide patch test trays should be used in assessing skin diseases in highly exposed workers.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1986

[Glossodynia--indication for patch testing?].

100 patients suffering from glossodynia without pathologic changes of the oral mucosa and 16 patients with suspected allergic contact stomatitis underwent patch testing using standard patch test and dental materials. The results were compared with those of patients in dental occupations suffering from hand eczema. As there is no clinical relevance of allergens in patients with glossodynia, patch testing seems to be unnecessary. On the other hand, patch test results of patients with stomatitis and dentures often suggest a causal allergy. In most of those cases, this was confirmed by complete healing after changing the denture bases, whereas in glossodynia such replacements never brought about a convincing improvement of the symptoms.

Dentures↗
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↗