Prevalence and causative allergens of contact cheilitis in Thailand.

BACKGROUND: Cheilitis is an inflammatory condition of the lips. Its causes can be exogenous (irritants, allergens), endogenous (atopic dermatitis, systemic disorders) or unknown. OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of allergic contact cheilitis (ACC), its risk factors, and common allergens in patients with cheilitis at a Thai university-based tertiary care hospital. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients with cheilitis referred for patch testing between January 2007 and December 2021. RESULTS: Among 5366 patients referred for patch testing, 410 (7.6%) had cheilitis. ACC was diagnosed in 32% of the cheilitis patients. Compared to non-ACC cases, the patients with ACC were more likely to be young and female and have a disease duration of <3 months, no underlying disease and a white-collar job (p-value <0.05). The most common contact allergens were patient's products (73.3%), nickel sulfate (29.8%), potassium dichromate (14.5%), castor oil (14.3%) and benzalkonium chloride (13.0%). Lip cosmetics and toothpastes were major ACC sources. CONCLUSIONS: ACC should be considered in cheilitis patients, especially in patients with specific risk factors. Castor oil is an emerging allergen. Patch testing using commercial allergen series and patients' own products is crucial for identifying causative agents. The development of a specific cheilitis series is warranted.

Contact sensitisation in oral lichen planus: An Australian perspective.

BACKGROUND: The role of contact sensitisation in the pathogenesis of oral lichen planus (OLP) has not been clearly defined. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to evaluate relevant contact sensitisers in OLP. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on OLP patients who underwent patch testing from 1 January 2006 to 31 December 2020 at an Australian tertiary dermatology institution, compared to cheilitis patients patch tested over the same time period. RESULTS: Ninety-six OLP patients and 152 cheilitis patients were patch tested during the 15-year period. Seventy-one (73.9%) OLP patients and 100 (65.8%) cheilitis patients recorded one or more relevant reactions. Forty-three (44.8%), 22 (22.9%), 21 (21.9%) and 17 (17.7%) OLP patients had relevant reactions to mercury-related chemicals, amalgam, spearmint and carvone, respectively, compared to 6 (3.9%), 3 (2.0%), 4 (2.6%) and 0 (0%) cheilitis patients, respectively (p-value <0.001 each). Four (4.2%) OLP patients had relevant positive reactions to sodium metabisulfite, compared to none in the cheilitis group (p-value 0.021). CONCLUSION: While dental amalgam is used less frequently these days, we report that mercury (found in amalgam) and additionally spearmint and carvone are relevant sensitisers in OLP in Australia. Sodium metabisulfite may also be a relevant sensitiser in OLP, which has not previously been reported.

Clinical predictors of metal allergic sensitization in orthodontic patients.

OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to assess the predictors of allergic sensitisation to titanium and nickel in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment. METHODS: A total of 250 patients undergoing orthodontic treatment were invited to participate, and 235 were analysed (67% females). A patch test was performed using nickel sulphate, titanium, titanium dioxide, titanium oxalate, titanium nitride, and petrolatum as control. In addition, clinical signs of the oral mucosa, gingiva, tongue, lips, and allergological history were assessed. RESULTS: The predictors of metal allergic sensitisation in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment were adult age (OR = 2.6; 95% CI: 1.2-5.5; p = 0.016), female sex (OR = 3.0; 95% CI: 1.1-7.9; p = 0.025), exfoliative cheilitis (OR = 4.8; 95% CI: 1.9-12.4; p = 0.001), history of contact hypersensitivity (OR = 7.0; 95% CI: 1.3-35.4; p = 0.025), history of contact hypersensitivity to metals (OR = 8.3; 95% CI: 1.4-50.2; p = 0.021), and piercings (OR = 5.4; 95% CI: 2.1-13.9; p = 0.001). When predictors were analysed separately for these two metals, titanium sensitisation predictors were contact hypersensitivity to metals and piercing, whereas nickel sensitisation predictors were age and piercing. CONCLUSION: A positive patch test alone cannot draw definite conclusions regarding allergy. However, metal allergies in patients with orthodontic appliances could be considered in cases of previous contact hypersensitivity, previous reactions to metals, exfoliative cheilitis, and piercing.

Lip mesotherapy with dexpanthenol in the treatment of isotretinoin-induced cheilitis.

INTRODUCTION: Cheilitis is the most common mucocutaneous side effect of isotretinoin (ISO). Dexpanthenol (DXP) increases fibroblast proliferation and re-epithelialization in wound healing. We aimed to investigate the effect of DXP-mesotherapy in ISO-induced cheilitis in this study. METHODS: This study was conducted on patients who had been using ISO (0.5-1 mg/kg/day) for at least 2 months. Twenty-five patients who administered DXP-mesotherapy (mesotherapy group) and 33 patients without the procedure (control group, only ointment) participated in this study. All patients were prescribed only hamamelis virginiana distillate in ointment form as a lip balm. The efficacy of the treatment was interpreted by the change in lip balm use frequency, quality of life, and Isotretinoin Cheilitis Grading Scale (ICGS). RESULTS: There was a statistically significant decrease in all ICGS-subgroups scores in the mesotherapy group after 1 month compared with the baseline (p = <0.001), although in the controls, erythema, crust, and fissure scores significantly increased (p = 0.001, p = 0.002).While there was no difference between the groups in terms of ICGS total scores at baseline, there was a significant difference after 1 month in favor of the mesotherapy group (p < 0.001). In the mesotherapy group, lip balms were needed significantly less frequently and there was a significant improvement in quality of life compared with both the control group and at baseline after 1 month (both; p < 0.001). On the other hand, the control patients suffered more from cheilitis and dryness than at baseline (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Dexpanthenol-mesotherapy seems to be a safe, and so effective method in management of ISO-related cheilitis.

Allergic contact cheilitis caused by propolis: case report.

Propolis is a lipophilic resin extracted from plants by bees. The purpose of this case report was to show the importance of this substance as cause of allergic contact cheilitis. A 21-year-old female patient complained of pruritic perioral eczema for 5 years. In the past months it also affected the neck. After diagnosing contact dermatitis, she was submitted to a patch test with a Latin American baseline series. The result was strongly positive for propolis (++) and weakly positive for perfume mix I (+). After the test, the patient revealed she had been using propolis drops, per oris, for 10 years. The worsening of the condition was due to increased dose, aiming "to improve immunity", during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The contact allergy to propolis might be increasing due to the widespread use of natural products. Propolis is a sensitizer to be considered in patients with long-lasting cheilitis.

Allergic contact cheilitis caused by propolis: case report

ABSTRACT Propolis is a lipophilic resin extracted from plants by bees. The purpose of this case report was to show the importance of this substance as cause of allergic contact cheilitis. A 21-year-old female patient complained of pruritic perioral eczema for 5 years. In the past months it also affected the neck. After diagnosing contact dermatitis, she was submitted to a patch test with a Latin American baseline series. The result was strongly positive for propolis (++) and weakly positive for perfume mix I (+). After the test, the patient revealed she had been using propolis drops, per oris, for 10 years. The worsening of the condition was due to increased dose, aiming "to improve immunity", during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. The contact allergy to propolis might be increasing due to the widespread use of natural products. Propolis is a sensitizer to be considered in patients with long-lasting cheilitis.

ASSESSMENT OF ALLERGIES TO FOOD AND ADDITIVES IN PATIENTS WITH ANGIOEDEMA, BURNING MOUTH SYNDROME, CHEILITIS, GINGIVOSTOMATITIS, ORAL LICHENOID REACTIONS, AND PERIORAL DERMATITIS.

Oral cavity and perioral area are constantly exposed to a variety of antigens, including food and additives, which have a potential role in the development of different oral mucosal and perioral cutaneous diseases since they can cause hypersensitivity reactions. Oral and perioral diseases mainly include angioedema, burning mouth syndrome, cheilitis, gingivostomatitis, oral lichenoid reactions, and perioral dermatitis. Previous studies were focused on delayed-type oral allergies by performing patch testing but did not include tests for immediate-type allergic reactions. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine common nutritive and additive allergens in the prevalent oral and perioral diseases by using skin prick tests. Our study evaluated 230 participants, i.e. 180 patients with oral/perioral diseases (angioedema, burning mouth syndrome, cheilitis, gingivostomatitis, oral lichenoid reactions, and perioral dermatitis), and 50 healthy control subjects. The results of skin prick tests showed that immediate-type allergic reactions to food and additives were mostly seen in patients with burning mouth syndrome (40%) and cheilitis (33.3%), whereas allergies were least frequently observed in perioral dermatitis (10%) and gingivostomatitis (20%). Fruits, mushrooms, and vegetables were the most frequent causes of nutritive allergies in oral and perioral diseases. The most commonly identified additive allergens were glutaraldehyde, citric acid, and sodium glutamate. Study results suggest the possible association with nutritive and additive allergies be considered in cases of persistent oral mucosal or perioral skin disease accompanied by respective medical history.

Effectiveness Of Oral Omega 3 In Reducing Mucocutaneous Side Effects Of Oral Isotretinoin In Patients With Acne Vulgaris.

BACKGROUND: Acne vulgaris has been a common clinical condition. Due to. high prevalence and unclear etio-pathogenesis of acne vulgaris, large number of treatment options have been available across the globe. Limited work has been done to explore the options which may manage or prevent these adverse effects and improve the adherence to the prescribed medications. We therefore conducted this trial to look for effectiveness of oral omega 3 in reducing mucocutaneous side effects of oral isotretinoin in patients with acne vulgaris. OBJECTIVE: To look for effectiveness of oral omega 3 in reducing mucocutaneous side effects of oral isotretinoin in patients with acne vulgaris. It was a randomized control trial conducted at Department of Dermatology Pak Emirates Military Hospital Rawalpindi. Ten months, June 2019 to May 2020. METHODS: A total of 60 patients of acne vulgaris put on oral isotretinoin by consultant dermatologist were included in the study. Patients were randomized into groups by lottery method. Group A received the placebo along with oral isotretinoin while Group B received oral omega 3 in standard dose in addition to oral isotretinoin. Comparison was made in both the groups regarding common mucocutaneous side effects. RESULTS: Out of 60patients with acne vulgaris and put on isotretinoin included in the study, 26 (43.3%) received placebo in addition to isotretinoin while 34 (56.7%) received omega 3 in addition to isotretinoin. Forty (66.7%) patients were female while 20 (33.3%) were male. Cheilitis 35 (58.3%) was the commonest side effect followed by lip dryness 33 (55%). Application of chi-square test revealed that cheilitis, lip dryness and xerosis were significantly found in more patients who received placebo as compared to those who received omega 3 along with isotretinoin. CONCLUSION: Mucocutaneous side effects were a very common finding among patients of acne vulgaris managed with isotretinoin. Cheilitis was the most reported mucocutaneous side effects among the target population. This RCT demonstrated that omega 3 was superior to placebo in order to prevent or manage cheilitis, xerosis or dry lips.

Allergic and photoallergic contact dermatitis to chlorpromazine.

Chlorpromazine is known to produce both systemic phototoxic and photoallergic reactions. However, it may also cause photoallergic contact dermatitis and, albeit exceptionally, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). We present a series of photoallergic contact dermatitis and ACD to chlorpromazine diagnosed at a tertiary centre cutaneous allergy unit between 1980 and 2019.

Patch Testing for Cheilitis: A 10-Year Series.

BACKGROUND: The etiology of cheilitis includes endogenous, irritant, and allergic dermatitis; lichenoid and granulomatous disorders; infection; trauma; and actinic damage. Patch testing is indicated for refractory cases (other than actinic cheilitis). OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to review demographics and allergens in patients patch tested for cheilitis at 2 sites in Sydney, Australia. METHODS: Records for patients patch tested for a 10-year period from 2007 to 2017 were reviewed. Baseline characteristics and patch test results were compared for patients with and without cheilitis. CONCLUSIONS: There were 1584 patients including 91 with cheilitis. Patients with cheilitis were more likely to be female, younger, and atopic and have concurrent eyelid involvement than those presenting with other dermatoses. Seventeen percent of patients with cheilitis had a post-patch test diagnosis of allergic contact cheilitis, and the most frequent relevant reactions were to patients' own products, fragrances, and sunscreens. Those with cheilitis had more positive reactions to sunscreens, especially benzophenones, compared with those without cheilitis (P < 0.001). This is an important finding in Australia where high rates of melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer necessitate promotion of strict sun protection measures.