An update on airborne contact dermatitis

Airborne-contact dermatitis of non-plant origin: an overview

Airborne-contact dermatitis (ABCD) represents a unique type of contact dermatitis originating from dust, sprays, pollens or volatile chemicals by airborne fumes or particles without directly touching the allergen. ABCD in Indian patients has been attributed exclusively by pollens of the plants like Parthenium hysterophorus, etc., but in recent years the above scenario has been changing rapidly in urban and semiurban perspective especially in developing countries. ABCD has been reported worldwide due to various type of nonplant allergens and their clinical feature are sometimes distinctive. Preventive aspect has been attempted by introduction of different chemicals of less allergic potential.

Airborne contact dermatitis - current perspectives in etiopathogenesis and management

The increasing recognition of occupational origin of airborne contact dermatitis has brought the focus on the variety of irritants, which can present with this typical morphological picture. At the same time, airborne allergic contact dermatitis secondary to plant antigens, especially to Compositae family, continues to be rampant in many parts of the world, especially in the Indian subcontinent. The recognition of the contactant may be difficult to ascertain and the treatment may be even more difficult. The present review focuses on the epidemiological, clinical and therapeutic issues in airborne contact dermatitis.

Hand/face/neck localized pattern: sticky problems--resins

Plastic resin systems have an increasingly diverse array of applications but also induce health hazards, the most common of which are allergic and irritant contact dermatitis. Contact urticaria, pigmentary changes, and photoallergic contact dermatitis may occasionally occur. Other health effects, especially respiratory and neurologic signs and symptoms, have also been reported. These resin systems include epoxies, the most frequent synthetic resin systems to cause contact dermatitis, (meth)acrylics, polyurethanes, phenol-formaldehydes, polyesters, amino resins (melamine-formaldehydes, urea-formaldehydes), polyvinyls, polystyrenes, polyolefins, polyamides and polycarbonates. Contact dermatitis usually occurs as a result of exposure to the monomers and additives in the occupational setting, although reports from consumers, using the raw materials or end products periodically surface. Resin- and additive-induced direct contact dermatitis usually presents on the hands, fingers, and forearms, while facial, eyelid, and neck involvement may occur through indirect contact, eg, via the hands, or from airborne exposure. Patch testing with commercially available materials, and in some cases the patient's own resins, is important for diagnosis. Industrial hygiene prevention techniques are essential to reduce contact dermatitis when handling these resin systems.

An update on airborne contact dermatitis: 2001-2006

Reports on airborne dermatoses are mainly published in the context of occupational settings. Hence, in recent years, dermatologists and also occupational physicians have become increasingly aware of the airborne source of contact dermatitis, resulting mainly from exposure to irritants or allergens. However, their occurrence is still underestimated, because reports often omit the term 'airborne' in relation to dust or volatile allergens. For the present update, we screened the journals 'Contact Dermatitis' (July 2000 to December 2006); 'Dermatitis', formerly named 'American Journal of Contact Dermatitis'; 'La Lettre du Gerda' (January 2000 to December 2006); and also included relevant articles from other journals published during the same period. This resulted in an updated list of airborne dermatitis causes.

Airborne irritant contact dermatitis and conjunctivitis after occupational exposure to chlorothalonil in textiles

Chlorothalonil (tetrachloro-1,3-benzenedicarbonitrile, CAS 1897-45-6) is a pesticide that has been on the market for many years. It is used as a fungicide in agriculture, horticulture, and floriculture; as a wood preservative; and in paint. We report an epidemic of airborne irritant contact dermatitis, conjunctivitis, and upper airway complaints among seamstresses in a Portuguese trailer tent factory, which we attribute to chlorothalonil. All exposed workers had work-related skin symptoms. After patch testing, we showed that none of these were of allergic origin. Instead of allergic reactions, we noticed a delayed type of irritation after 72 hr to chlorothalonil and to the textile extracts containing high concentrations of chlorothalonil. Although allergic and irritant contact dermatitis from chlorothalonil has been described before, this is, as far as we know, the first time that a delayed type of dermatitis, conjunctivitis, and upper airway irritation after exposure to chlorothalonil in tent-cloth is described.

Drug-induced photoallergic and phototoxic reactions

Drug-induced photosensitivity involves reactions to medication triggered by exposure of the skin to ultraviolet light. Medications that trigger reactions can be topical or oral. Following interaction of ultraviolet radiation with a chemical present in sufficient amounts in the skin, one of the several reactions may occur in susceptible patients, most commonly photoallergy or phototoxicity. These reactions can be diagnosed separately based on pathogenesis, clinical characteristics and histopathology. Phototoxic disorders have a higher incidence than photoallergic disorders. The action spectra for most photoallergens and phototoxins lie in the ultraviolet A range. Subtypes of drug-induced photosensitivity include dyschromia, pseudoporphyria, photo onycholysis, and lichenoid and telangiectatic reactions.

Airborne contact dermatitis due to Japanese cedar pollen

Contact dermatitis caused by airborne antigen is a well-recognized problem. Previously, airborne contact dermatitis after contact with Japanese cedar pollen [Japanese cedar pollen dermatitis (JCPD)] has been reported in Japan. However, there is still no diagnostic test to evaluate contact dermatitis due to Japanese cedar pollen. Skin tests with Japanese cedar pollen have been used to investigate these patients. A histological analysis was also conducted to clarify the mechanism of JCPD. We performed a scratch-patch test, scratch test and assays for total immunoglobulin E (IgE) and specific IgE in 13 patients suspected to have skin symptoms from Japanese cedar pollen, 5 patients with Japanese cedar pollinosis and 15 control normal subjects. All subjects were tested with Japanese cedar pollen allergen extract. A skin biopsy was performed from a Japanese cedar pollen-scratch-patch-test positive in patients with JCPD. The result after 48 hr of scratch-patch test was compared with the patient's history and the findings of corresponding scratch test and specific IgE. 100% of the 13 patients with JCPD showed a positive scratch-patch-test reaction to Japanese cedar pollen extract. However, 20% of the patients with the Japanese cedar pollinosis without any eruptions showed a positive scratch-patch-test reaction. The percentage of positive results for specific IgE and the scratch test did not differ substantially between Japanese cedar pollionosis patients with a history of chronic erythema after contact with Japanese cedar pollen and those without such a history. No side-effects were observed regarding the scratch-patch test. Control subjects showed 7% positive reaction. Histological examination showed that eczematous change (spongiosis, intracellular oedema and acanthosis), and infiltration of lymphocytes and eosinophils were all observed at the scratch-patch-test-positive sites. We therefore concluded that the use of the scratch-patch test with Japanese cedar pollen extract was useful for accurately diagnosing JCPD.

Causal agents of photoallergic contact dermatitis diagnosed in the national institute of dermatology of Colombia

OBJECTIVE

To describe and identify the photoallergens causing photoallergic contact dermatitis in the population attending the outpatient clinic of the Centro Dermatologico Federico Lleras Acosta (CDFLLA), the National Institute of Dermatology of Colombia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Eighty-two patients with clinical diagnosis of photoallergic contact dermatitis enter the study. These patients attended the CDFLLA between August 2001 and May 2003. Photopatch tests were performed using the standard series of sunscreens (Chemotechnique Diagnostics) and 6-methylcoumarin. Cetyl alcohol, phenoxyethanol, methylparabene, propylene glycol, triethanolamine, propylparabene, trichlorocarbanilide and dichromate were also included. The allergens were applied in duplicate on the healthy skin of the back and covered with opaque tape withdrawn 24 h later, the panel on the right was irradiated with an ultraviolet A dose of 5 J/cm(2). The tests were read 24 h after the application of the allergens, 24 and 72 h post-irradiation. The readings were assessed according to the visual scoring system recommended by the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group.

RESULTS

Twenty-six patients (31.7%) showed positive photopatch test responses to one or several allergens. Four of them showed positive results to three components of the series and four patients to two components. Thirty-eight photoallergic and 18 allergic reactions were observed. Ultraviolet filters were the substances which more frequently produced positive photopatch test responses (30.5%). The most common ultraviolet filter photoallergen was benzophenone-3 with 22/82 positive results (26.8%), followed by octyl methoxycinnamate (8/82), benzophenone-4 and mexenone (2/82), phenylbenzimidazole sulphonic acid, methylbenziliden camphor and octyl dimethyl PABA (1/82). One patient showed a photoallergic response to 6-methylcoumarin. There was a concordance between the allergen which elicited the positive response and the use of different substances which contained that molecule among its compounds in 17 patients (65.3%). 19.5% of the patients (16/82) showed positive results to one or several allergens in the irradiated panel as well as in the unirradiated control site. These cases were diagnosed as contact allergy, probably caused by aeroallergens, presenting a natural history and a clinical picture similar to photocontact allergy. The most common allergen was dichromate with 10 positive results.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study confirm that sunscreens are the more frequently involved substances in photoallergic contact dermatitis in our population. Identification of the photoallergen is the key element for adequate disease control and patient education.

Rosemary contact dermatitis and cross-reactivity with other labiate plants

Rosemary, a plant belonging to the labiate family, is frequently used in the making of cosmetics and also for medicinal purposes. There are few reported cases of contact dermatitis due to this plant. Here we present 1 case and asses the existence of cross-reactivity with plants from the same family. 53-year-old man with several episodes of a pruritic and erythematous eruption that resulted in peeling of the skin, after applying rosemary alcohol, on the chest reported. Epicutaneous tests were done with the standard European series (GEIDC), with the commercial plant series (Bial-Aristegui) and with plants from the labiate family. Results were positive for 3 of 4 labiate species tested. we present a case of rosemary contact dermatitis, where we have found cross-reactivity with 3 of 4 species tested from the same family.

Airborne chemicals cause respiratory symptoms in individuals with contact allergy

Exposure to fragrance chemicals causes various eye and airway symptoms. Individuals with perfume contact allergy report these symptoms more frequently than individuals with nickel allergy or no contact allergies. However, the associations between contact allergy and respiratory symptoms elicited by airborne chemicals other than perfumes are unclear. The study aimed to investigate the association between eye and airway symptoms elicited by airborne chemicals (other than perfumes) and contact allergy in a population-based sample. A questionnaire on respiratory symptoms was posted, in 2002, to 1189 individuals who participated in 1997/1998 in a Danish population-based study of allergic diseases. Questions about eye and airway symptoms elicited by different airborne chemicals and airborne proteins were included in the questionnaire. Data from the questionnaire were compared with data on patch testing and prick testing. Having at least 1 positive patch test (adjusted odds ratio 1.7, 95% CI 1.2-2.5) was associated with the symptoms, and the odds ratio increased with the number of positive patch tests (P-value for test for trend <0.05). Bronchial hyperreactivity, female sex and psychological vulnerability were independently associated with symptoms, but no association was found between prick test reactivity to proteins and the symptoms elicited by airborne chemicals.

An 8-year experience in airborne contact dermatitis

OBJECTIVE

A large number of case reports concerning occupational airborne contact dermatitis have been published in the last few years. Our purpose was to establish the prevalence of airborne contact dermatitis in a routinely patch-tested population and to obtain further epidemiologic data.

METHODS

In a single-center study, the data of 5,092 routinely patch-tested patients were collected using a standardized questionnaire and a documentation form. The study period extended from October 1994 to March 2002.

RESULTS

The clinical diagnosis was airborne contact dermatitis in 15 cases (0.29%). Patch testing revealed positive and relevant results in nine patients (0.18%). Plant or wood extracts were the sensitizers in all cases but two, and perfume and epoxy resin were the sensitizers in one case each. The diagnosis of an irritant airborne contact dermatitis was established in six patients. A relationship with occupation was found in seven cases (0.14%) when 'housewife' was included as an occupational category and in five cases (0.1%) when this was excluded.

CONCLUSION

Airborne contact dermatitis is a rare diagnosis in an unselected patch-test population. An occupational relationship was less common than has been implied in case reports in recent years.

Airborne contact dermatitis from Ambrosia deltoidea (triangle-leaf bursage)

3 cases of contact dermatitis due to exposure to airborne allergens from Ambrosia deltoidea (triangle-leaf bursage) are presented. Although airborne plant dermatitis was suggested in each case by a history of aggravation of the rash by outdoor exposure and typical skin lesions, patch testing with an oleoresinous extract of A. deltoidea leaves identified the source of the sensitizer, not previously reported. As A. deltoidea is a ragweed that probably contains sesquiterpene lactones nearly identical to those of ragweeds widely prevalent in most of North America, the patients presented indicate the need for commercially available, standardized, plant extracts for patch testing in this country. The finding of positive patch tests with filters from an air sampler placed in 1 patient's domestic environment suggests a new avenue of investigation in airborne contact dermatitis.