Materials and allergens within spectacle frames: a review

Allergic contact dermatitis from dyes used in the temple of spectacles

BACKGROUND

We observed an increasing number of patients who presented with facial or retro-auricular dermatitis after skin contact with plastic spectacles or plastic covered temples.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the allergens in plastic spectacles that may cause allergic contact dermatitis.

METHODS

All patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis to eyewear were tested with Solvent Orange 60 (SO60), four additionally with Solvent Yellow 14 (SY14), and five with scrapings from their own spectacles. In one case, a chemical analysis of the spectacles was performed to uncover the causative allergen.

RESULTS

Three patients were allergic to SO60, two patients to SY14, and two patients were allergic to both SO60 and SY14.

CONCLUSION

Patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis from spectacles should be tested with SO60 and SY14, and based on findings from previous reports, also with Solvent Red 179.

Contact alternatives to nickel

Allergic contact dermatitis to nickel is a continued health concern internationally. Nickel has been found to be the most prevalent and relevant allergen in tested populations for the last 3 decades. Furthermore, recent data from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group demonstrate positive patch-test reactions to nickel at approximately 19.5% of their tested population and a significant increase in the positivity rates for the last decade (Dermatitis. 2013;24:10-21. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1998;38:911-918). Because of the rise in allergic contact dermatitis rates to nickel, the American Contact Dermatitis Society recognized nickel to be the 2008 Allergen of the Year (J Am Acad Dermatol. 2009;60:1067-1069; Dermatitis. 2008;19:3-8). This article recognizes the importance of nickel avoidance and highlights potential alternatives.

The fine scratches of the spectacle frames and the allergic contact dermatitis

Background

Spectacle contact allergy is not infrequent. The fine scratches on the spectacle frames which may play a role in the sensitization to the potential allergenic components have not been studied.

Objective

We sought the relationship between the scratches on the spectacle frames and the allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in the Republic of Korea.

Methods

A total of 42 Korean patients with ACD at the spectacle contact sites were enrolled. Their spectacle frames were examined with the dimethylglyoxime (DMG) test and analyzed by the scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS). Patch tests (thin-layer rapid use epicutaneous test [TRUE tests]) were performed to identify the skin allergens.

Results

The DMG-positive spectacle frames were identified in 78.5% of the frames. The SEM results showed that there were more scratches on the skin-contacting parts of the spectacle frames than the non-skin-contacting parts of the same frames. In the EDS findings, the mean nickel content (weight, %) of the spectacle frames was 15.7±5.5, and the mean chromium content was 20.3±3.4 at the skin-contacting parts. In the TRUE tests, nickel sulphate was the most common allergen (31 cases, 73.8%), and potassium dichromate was the second (9 cases, 21.4%). Three patients presented simultaneous positive reactions with nickel sulphate and potassium dichromate.

Conclusion

Minor visible and non-visible fine scratches on the spectacle frames may present the provocation factors of the ACD. Nickel sulphate was the most common allergen suspected of provoking the spectacle frame-induced ACD, followed by potassium dichromate.

Optical dispensing: the science of vision or blind faith?

The evidence for the basic optometric function of optical dispensing is discussed in terms of the basic principles of scientific debate. The degree of rigour applied to product testing and evaluation of most other medically related areas is lacking in the dispensing of spectacles. There has been much debate on the place of religious faith in our society. Religious belief masquerading as science has come in for particular scrutiny. However, little attention has been paid to the equally contentious issue of non-religious belief, within scientific disciplines, masquerading as science. It could be argued that optical dispensing is, to a significant degree, such a case.

[Facial allergic contact dermatitis. Data from the IVDK and review of literature]

The face is exposed to many foreign substances and may thus be a site of allergic contact dermatitis. Our aim is to elucidate the spectrum of factors associated with facial dermatitis by analyzing data of patients patch tested in the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) between 1995 and 2007. In 18,572 patients the main anatomical site of dermatitis was the face. Among these, the proportion of females and of patients with past or present atopic eczema was increased, while probable occupational causation was less common than in the overall group. Cosmetic allergens, as well as nickel, were significantly more common in women than men, including fragrance mix (10.8% vs. 8.3%), p-phenylenediamine (4.0% vs. 2.8%), lanolin alcohols (3.0% vs. 2.2%), Lyral(TM) (3.1% vs. 2.0%) and bufexamac (1.8% vs. 1.1%). In comparison, only epoxy resin contact allergy was diagnosed significantly more often in men than women: In patients with airborne contact dermatitis, over-represented allergens included sesquiterpene lactone mix, compositae mix, epoxy resin, (chloro-) methylisothiazolinone and oil of turpentine. In the clinical approach to patients with facial dermatitis, occupational airborne causation should be considered in addition to non-occupational (e.g., cosmetic) allergen exposure.