Allergic Contact Dermatitis, an Important Skin Reaction in Diabetes Device Users: A Systematic Review

Device-Related Skin Reactions Increase Emotional Burden in Youths With Type 1 Diabetes and Their Parents

BACKGROUND

Skin reactions due to technological devices pose a significant concern in the management of type 1 diabetes (T1D). This multicentric, comparative cross-sectional study aimed to assess the psychological impact of device-related skin issues on youths with T1D and their parents.

METHODS

Participants with skin reactions were matched in a 1:1 ratio with a control group. Diabetes-related emotional distress was evaluated using the Problem Areas in Diabetes-Teen version (PAID-T) for participants aged 11 to 19 years and the Problem Areas in Diabetes-Parent Revised version (PAID-PR) completed by parents. In addition, glucose control was assessed through glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) values and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics.

RESULTS

A total of 102 children and adolescents were consecutively recruited. Adolescents with skin issues had higher PAID-T scores compared to those without (79.6 ± 21.1 vs 62 ± 16.8; P = .004). Parents of youths with skin reactions also reported higher PAID-PR scores than the control group (34.0 ± 11.0 vs 26.9 ± 12.3; P = .015). No differences were observed in HbA1c levels (6.9 ± 0.8% vs 6.8 ± 0.8%, P = .555) or CGM glucose metrics between the two groups. Remarkably, 25.5% were forced to discontinue insulin pumps and/or glucose sensors (21.5% and 5.9%, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study highlighted the increased emotional burden experienced by youths with T1D and their parents due to device-related skin reactions, emphasizing the need for further research and interventions in this crucial aspect of diabetes management.

[Translated article] Medical Devices in Patients With Diabetes and Contact Dermatitis

The development and commercialization of glucose sensors and insulin pumps has revolutionized the management of diabetes. These devices have been linked to multiple cases of contact dermatitis in recent years, however, giving rise to a growing interest in identifying the sensitizing allergens. Isobornyl acrylate was clearly identified as one of the main allergens responsible for contact dermatitis among users of the FreeStyle glucose sensor and was subsequently removed from the product ingredients. Remarkably, however, it is still used in most other sensors on the market. The common adhesive ingredients colophony and abietic acid derivatives have also been shown to be sensitizing agents. New components under study, such as dipropylene glycol diacrylate, N,N-dimethylacrylamide, and triethylene glycol methacrylate have recently been identified as allergens, though they are not commercially available for clinical testing. The benefits offered by glucose sensors and insulin pumps may be offset by sensitization to product ingredients, in some cases forcing discontinuation and diminishing quality of life. Dermatologists should play a role in this clinical and research scenario, offering case-by-case guidance to endocrinologists on skin care and possible alternatives for patients with glucose sensors and insulin pumps who develop contact dermatitis. They should also collaborate with the manufacturers developing these devices.

Systemic allergic contact dermatitis to palladium, platinum, and titanium: mechanisms, clinical manifestations, prevalence, and therapeutic approaches

Contact dermatitis (CD) is an inflammatory skin disease of eczema that is elicited by chemicals or metal ions that have toxic effects without eliciting a T-cell response (contact elicitation) or by small reactive chemicals that modify proteins and induce innate and adaptive immune responses (contact allergens). The clinical condition is characterized by localized skin rash, pruritus, redness, swelling, and lesions, which are mainly detected by patch tests and lymphocyte stimulation. Heavy metals such as palladium (Pd), platinum (Pt), and titanium (Ti) are ubiquitous in our environment. These heavy metals have shown CD effects as allergic agents. Immunological responses result from the interaction of cytokines and T cells. Occupational metal CD accounts for most cases of work-related cutaneous disorders. In this systematic review, the allergic effects of heavy metals, including Pd, Pt, and Ti, and the mechanisms, clinical manifestations, prevalence, and therapeutic approaches are discussed in detail. Furthermore, the therapeutic approaches introduced to treat CD, including corticosteroids, topical calcineurin inhibitors, systemic immunosuppressive agents, phototherapy, and antihistamines, can be effective in the treatment of these diseases in the future. Ultimately, the insights identified could lead to improved therapeutic and diagnostic pathways.

First International Survey on Diabetes Providers' Assessment of Skin Reactions in Youth With Type 1 Diabetes Using Technological Devices

BACKGROUND

Advances in diabetes technological devices led to optimization of diabetes care; however, long-lasting skin exposure to devices may be accompanied by an increasing occurrence of cutaneous reactions.

METHODS

We used an open-link web-based survey to evaluate diabetes-care providers' viewpoint on prevalence, management practices, and knowledge related to skin reactions with the use of diabetes technological devices. A post hoc analysis was applied to investigate differences in the level of awareness on this topic in relation to the experience in diabetes technology.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-five responses from 39 different countries were collected. Most respondents (69%) routinely examine patients' skin at each visit. All the preventive measures are not clear and, mainly, homogenously put into clinical practice. Contact dermatitis was the most frequently reported cutaneous complication due to diabetes devices, and its most common provocative causes are not yet fully known by diabetes-care providers. Almost half of the respondents (42%) had discussed the presence of harmful allergens contained in adhesives with device manufacturers. There is general agreement on the need to strengthen knowledge on dermatological complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Although diabetes-care providers are quite aware of the chance to develop skin reactions in people with diabetes using technological devices, there are still some unmet needs. Large follow-up studies and further dissemination tools are awaited to address the gaps revealed by our survey.

A Skin Care Program to Prevent Skin Problems due to Diabetes Devices in Children and Adolescents: A Cluster-Controlled Intervention Study

OBJECTIVE

Diabetes devices that deliver insulin and measure blood glucose levels are cornerstones in modern treatment of type 1 diabetes. However, their use is frequently associated with the development of skin problems, particularly eczema and wounds. Proper skin care may prevent skin problems, yet evidence-based information from interventional studies is missing. Providing this information is the aim of this study.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This cluster-controlled intervention study tested the efficacy of a basic skin care program (including use of lipid cream, removal, and avoidance of disinfection). A total of 170 children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes were included and assigned either to the intervention group (n = 112) or the control group (n = 58). Participants were seen quarterly the first year after device initiation, with clinical assessment and interview in an unblinded setting.

RESULTS

Eczema or wounds were observed in 33.6% of the intervention group compared with 46.6% of control participants (absolute difference, 12.9% [95% CI -28.7%, 2.9%]; P = 0.10). The adjusted odds of wound development were decreased by 71% in the intervention compared with control group (for wounds, odds ratio 0.29 [95% CI 0.12, 0.68]; P = 0.005). In total, only eight infections were seen, without a higher frequency in the intervention group, despite advice to omit disinfection.

CONCLUSIONS

These data indicate our basic skin care program partially prevented diabetes device-induced skin reactions. However, more preventive strategies with other adhesives, patches, and/or types of lotions are needed for optimized prevention.

A toddler with systemic contact dermatitis caused by diabetes devices

Continuous glucose monitors (CGM) and insulin pumps have become the preferred treatment option for most young children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D), by avoiding fingerstick testing and providing real-time glucose measurements. These medical devices and their adhesives contain substances which have been identified as being responsible for allergic contact dermatitis. We describe the case of a toddler who developed severe contact dermatitis from her diabetes devices, leading to secondary infections and hospital admissions. This was followed by the development of a symmetrical exanthema with retroauricular and glutaeal distribution. Patch tests were positive for isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) and 4-tert-butylcatechol (PTBC). Her symmetrical exanthema was interpreted as systemic contact dermatitis due to IBOA and PTBC in her diabetes devices. We suspect that systemic contact dermatitis is an underreported complication in diabetic patients.

Safety and user experience with off-label use of a flash glucose monitor (FreeStyle Libre® 1) among very young children with type 1 diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVES

FreeStyle Libre 1 (FGM) has been approved by the FDA for children older than 4 years. It enables noninvasive glucose monitoring without the need for finger pricking. Parents of very young children often use the device off-label. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the safety of and user experience with FreeStyle Libre^® 1 and determine its impact on sleep and glycemic control.

METHODS

This was an ambi-directional cohort study. We recruited parents of very young children with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) who were less than 5 years old when they started using FGM at the King Saud University Diabetes Center. The parents filled out a survey evaluating their experience with the system. In addition, the glucose metrics of the children were also obtained from the Libre View system.

RESULTS

We included 31 children with mean age of the children when they started using FGM was 3.88 ± 1.10 years (range, 1.46-5.4 years), and the mean sensor use was 2.3 ± 1.3 years. During the use of the device, the parents had increased sleep duration of 0.71 h (p-value=0.04), had earlier bedtime by 2.8 h (p-value=0.04), and were able to sleep in a separate room from their children. In addition, the time in range improved by 9.9%, the time above range decreased by 8.8%, and the HbA_1c level reduced by 1.56%.

CONCLUSIONS

The safety profile of FGM used for very young children with T1DM is the same for older children, which leads to improved metabolic control and sleep quality of both the parent and the child.