Systemic Contact Dermatitis: A review

Contact Dermatitis to Diabetes Medical Devices

Skin adverse reactions to diabetes medical devices have been reported frequently over recent years. Adhesives attaching glucose sensors and continuous insulin infusion sets to the skin are proven to cause both allergic contact dermatitis and irritant contact dermatitis in patients with diabetes mellitus. Several allergens contained in adhesives and/or parts of medical devices are documented to cause allergic contact dermatitis, with acrylate chemicals being the most common culprit-especially isobornyl acrylate (IBOA), but also 2,2'-methylenebis(6-tert-butyl-4-methylphenol) monoacrylate or cyanoacrylates. Epoxy resin, colophonium and nickel were also identified as causative allergens. However, repetitive occlusion, maceration of the skin and resulting disruption of the skin barrier seem to have an impact on the development of skin lesions as well. The purpose of this study is to highlight the burden of contact dermatitis triggered by diabetes medical devices and to show possible mechanisms responsible for the development of contact dermatitis in a group of diabetic patients.

Novel insights into contact dermatitis

Contact dermatitis is a common disease, caused by repeated skin contact to contact allergens or irritants, resulting in allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and/or irritant contact dermatitis. Attempts have been made to identify biomarkers to distinguish irritant and allergic patch test reactions, which could aid diagnosis. Some promising candidates have recently been identified, but verification and validation in clinical cases still need to be done. New causes of ACD are constantly recognized. In this review, 10 new contact allergens from recent years, were identified, several relating to anti-age products. Frequent allergens causing considerable morbidity in the population such as the preservative methylisothiazolinone (MI) have been regulated in EU. A significant drop in cases has been seen, while high rates are still occurring in other areas such as North America. Other frequent causes are fragrance allergens especially widely used terpenes and acrylates used in medical devises for control of diabetes. These represent unsolved problems. Recent advances in immunology have opened for a better understanding of the complexity of contact dermatitis, especially ACD. The disease may be more heterogenous that previous understood with several subtypes. With the rapidly evolving molecular understanding of the disease, the potential for development of new drugs for personalized treatment of contact dermatitis is considerable.

Systemic allergic dermatitis (systemic contact dermatitis) from pharmaceutical drugs: A review

The literature on systemic allergic dermatitis (SAD; also known as systemic contact dermatitis) is reviewed. Both topical drugs (from absorption through mucosae or skin) and systemic drugs (oral, parenteral, rectal) may be responsible for the disorder. The topical route appears to be rare with 41 culprit topical drugs found to cause SAD in 95 patients. Most reactions are caused by budesonide (especially from inhalation), bufexamac, and dibucaine. SAD from systemic drugs is infrequent with 95 culprit drugs found to cause SAD in 240 patients. The drugs most frequently implicated are mitomycin C, methylprednisolone (salt, ester), and hydrocortisone (salt). The largest group of culprit drugs consisted of corticosteroids (19%), being responsible for >30% of the reactions, of which nearly 40% were not caused by therapeutic drugs, but by drug provocation tests. The most frequent manifestations of SAD from drugs are eczematous eruptions (scattered, widespread, generalized, worsening, reactivation), maculopapular eruptions, symmetrical drug-related intertriginous and flexural exanthema (SDRIFE [baboon syndrome]) and widespread erythema or erythroderma. Therapeutic systemic drugs hardly ever cause reactivation of previously positive patch tests and infrequently of previous allergic contact dermatitis. The pathophysiology of SAD has received very little attention. Explanations for the rarity of SAD are suggested.

Adult skin acute stress responses to short-term environmental and internal aggression from exposome factors

Exposome factors that lead to stressed skin can be defined as any disturbance to homeostasis from environmental (meteorological factors, solar radiation, pollution or tobacco smoke) and/or internal exposure (unhealthy diet, hormonal variations, lack of sleep, psychosocial stress). The clinical and biological impact of chronic exposome effects on skin functions has been extensively reviewed, whereas there is a paucity of information on the impact of short‐term acute exposure. Acute stress, which would typically last minutes to hours (and generally no more than a week), provokes a transient but robust neuroendocrine‐immune and tissue remodelling response in the skin and can alter the skin barrier. Firstly, we provide an overview of the biological effects of various acute stressors on six key skin functions, namely the skin physical barrier, pigmentation, defences (antioxidant, immune cell‐mediated, microbial and microbiome maintenance), structure (extracellular matrix and appendages), neuroendocrine and thermoregulation functions. Secondly, we describe the biological and clinical effects on adult skin from individual exposome factors that elicit an acute stress response and their consequences in skin health maintenance. Clinical manifestations of acutely stressed skin may include dry skin that might accentuate fine lines, oily skin, sensitive skin, pruritus, erythema, pale skin, sweating, oedema and flares of inflammatory skin conditions such as acne, rosacea, atopic dermatitis, pigmentation disorders and skin superinfection such as viral reactivation. Acute stresses can also induce scalp sensitivity, telogen effluvium and worsen alopecia.