RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Disperse dyes (DDs) are the most prevalent causes of textile-related allergic contact dermatitis and are used for colouring synthetic textile materials based on fibres such as polyester, acrylic, acetate and polyamide. Eight DDs are included in a textile dye mix (TDM) 6.6% petrolatum (pet.) in the European baseline patch test series. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to patch test TDM 6.6% pet. positive individuals with the extracts of synthetic fibre clothes that do not contain any of the pure DDs present in the TDM 6.6% to study the reactivity pattern. METHODS: Seventy-three TDM-positive former patients tested between 2012 and 2017 at the Department of Occupational and Environmental Dermatology in Malmö, Sweden were invited to join the study, 10 participated. Twenty-four textile items (collected in nine countries in Europe, Asia and North America in 2012) were extracted in dichloromethane. The TDM 6.6% was patch tested simultaneously with the 24 textile item preparations in petrolatum made from the extracts. Prior to patch testing the participants filled the 7-question questionnaire regarding possible symptoms from textile exposure. RESULTS: Ten individuals, agreed to join the study. Eight of them reacted to TDM 6.6%. Nine participants reacted to 20 of 24 extracts. One reacted to 19 extracts, another to 14, 3 to 5 extracts, 1 to 4, 1 to 3 extracts and 2 to 2 extracts. One was negative to all tested preparations including TDM 6.6%. The participants mainly reacted to six textile extracts. All controls tested negatively to tested extracts. Four individuals of the 10 TDM-allergic individuals previously had had problems after wearing clothes. Four out of the 10 participants had had atopic eczema in childhood. All women had dyed their hair with permanent hair dyes but none of the males. CONCLUSION: TDM-positive patients react to textile extracts made from synthetic garments, even if they do not contain any of the pure DDs present in TDM 6.6%. More studies are needed to pin-point the culprit haptens in these extracts.
Asunto(s)
Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto , Tinturas para el Cabello , Alérgenos/efectos adversos , Vestuario , Colorantes/efectos adversos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/diagnóstico , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Pruebas del Parche/métodos , Vaselina , Textiles/efectos adversosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Toothpastes have widespread use in the population, and contain flavours to give a pleasant and often minty aroma. Flavours are prevalent allergens in toothpastes, and adverse reactions often present as perioral dermatitis or stomatitis. l-Carvone, a mint flavour found in spearmint oil, is one of these allergens. There are few studies on contact allergy to l-carvone, and some of them have indicated a positive relationship with oral lichenoid lesions. OBJECTIVES: To qualitatively and quantitatively investigate the presence of l-carvone in commercially available toothpastes on the Swedish market. METHODS: l-Carvone in 66 toothpastes was analysed with straight-phase high-performance liquid chromatography. The product labels were studied with regard to limonene. RESULTS: l-Carvone was found in 64 of 66 toothpastes (concentration: 0.00005-0.35%). In 10 of these, the concentration exceeded 0.1%. Higher concentrations of l-carvone were found if limonene was listed on the label. CONCLUSION: The majority of toothpastes on the Swedish market contain l-carvone, but the concentration hardly relates to the advertised flavour or labelled ingredients. It is hitherto unknown whether the found concentrations are sufficient for induction of contact allergy in individuals with healthy oral mucosa or in those with oral lichenoid lesions or other mucosal disease.
Asunto(s)
Monoterpenos/análisis , Pastas de Dientes/efectos adversos , Alérgenos/efectos adversos , Monoterpenos Ciclohexánicos , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , Humanos , Masculino , Aceites Volátiles , Estereoisomerismo , Suecia , Pastas de Dientes/químicaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Contact allergy to textile dyes is not uncommon. The allergy is detected by patch testing patients with commercial patch test preparations. OBJECTIVE: To investigate 8 disperse dyes (DDs) used for patch testing in the departments in Malmö and in Leuven and to compare them with test preparations used at various dermatology departments. MATERIALS/METHODS: The investigated DDs were Disperse Blue (DB) 35, 106, and 124, Disperse Yellow (DY) 3, Disperse Orange (DO) 1 and 3, and Disperse Red (DR) 1 and 17. From 13 clinics, 107 petrolatum preparations were analysed using high-performance liquid chromatography and thin-layer chromatography (TLC), and compared with reference substances obtained at the Malmö laboratory. Concerning DB 35, no reference substance could be identified. RESULTS: TLC visualized impurities in all DDs. For each DD, except DB 35, the mean concentration in the preparations labelled to contain 1.0% (w/w) were DB 106: 0.30%, DB 124: 0.25%, DY 3: 0.44%, DO 1: 0.40%, DO 3: 0.68%, DR 1: 0.49%, and DR 17: 0.35%; there were variations between the samples also with regard to the number of impurities. DO 3 could not be demonstrated in 4/15 preparations labelled DO 3. CONCLUSION: The results may have implications for individual diagnosis and prevention and when comparing test results from various centres.
Asunto(s)
Alérgenos/química , Compuestos Azo/análisis , Colorantes/análisis , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/diagnóstico , Pruebas del Parche/normas , Alérgenos/efectos adversos , Antraquinonas/análisis , Compuestos Azo/efectos adversos , Compuestos Azo/química , Cromatografía Líquida de Alta Presión , Cromatografía en Capa Delgada , Colorantes/efectos adversos , Colorantes/química , Dermatitis Alérgica por Contacto/etiología , HumanosRESUMEN
Hair dyes contain strong allergens and are widely available. Correct labelling is a necessity in order to provide information about the contents. To compare the labelling and content of hair dyes. In total, 52 hair dyes, from 11 different countries, were bought over the counter. High-pressure liquid chromatography was used for the analysis of p-phenylenediamine (PPD), toluene-2,5-diamine (2,5-TDA), and three oxidation products of PPD. There was good agreement between labelling and content, although seven of the 52 products (13.5%) studied were incorrectly labelled. There were differences in the geographical use of PPD and 2,5-TDA; 2,5-TDA was more common in European products, while PPD was more common in products purchased outside Europe and was present in higher concentrations. All dyes purchased in Europe contained PPD and 2,5-TDA at levels within the limits defined by European legislation, however, levels were higher in some products purchased outside Europe. Only a small group of hair dyes sold in Europe were mislabelled. Further improvement in labelling, by providing the concentration of chemicals, may facilitate products to be purchased both locally and within the global market, when travelling or on the internet.
Asunto(s)
Tinturas para el Cabello/química , Fenilendiaminas/análisis , Etiquetado de Productos , Cromatografía Líquida de Alta Presión , Seguridad de Productos para el Consumidor , Europa (Continente) , Tinturas para el Cabello/normas , Etiquetado de Productos/legislación & jurisprudenciaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Contact allergy to acrylates and methacrylates is not uncommon. The allergy is confirmed by patch-testing patients with commercial patch-test preparations. OBJECTIVE: To investigate acrylate and methacrylate allergens used for patch testing in nine different dermatology departments from Europe, America, Asia, and Australia. METHODS: The acrylate and methacrylate (methyl methacrylate, 2-hydroxypropyl acrylate, 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate, ethylene glycol dimethacrylate, and triethylene glycol diacrylate) allergen samples were analyzed with high-performance liquid chromatography to measure the allergen content. RESULTS: Variation in measured versus stated concentrations was seen in these samples. The ratio of measured to stated concentrations ranged from 0.11 to 1.1. Only 22 (63%) of 35 samples were within the arbitrary acceptable limits of 80 to 120% of the stated concentrations. CONCLUSION: The results may have implications for individual diagnosis and prevention and when test results from various centers are compared.