Axillary Contact Dermatitis: An Update on Potential Allergens and Management.

The differential diagnosis of dermatoses in the axillae is broad. Contact dermatitis-both irritant and allergic-represents common etiologies. Axillary contact dermatitis can develop following exposure to a variety of irritants and/or allergens. Frequently implicated sources include deodorants, antiperspirants, detergents, soaps, and clothing. Fragrance, a ubiquitous ingredient within these products, as well as metals and dyes, are common causes of contact dermatitis. Clinical assessment, bedside diagnostic techniques, histopathology, and patch testing can aid in the diagnosis and help inform management directions.

The effect of electrical stimulation on skin vulnerability to irritants.

PURPOSE: Electrical stimulation (ES) is a widely used technique in the medical field for various purposes. The effect of ES on several skin properties has been investigated; however, its effect on skin vulnerability to irritants remains unknown. This study aimed to investigate the effects of ES application on skin vulnerability to external irritants. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An experimental study on 12 healthy male subjects (Mean ± SD, 22.9 ± 3.6 years) who completed the study. The subjects were free of skin abnormalities in the volar aspect of both forearms. Three areas were allocated to each forearm and marked as areas 1, 2, and A in the treated forearm, and areas 3, 4, and B in the control forearm. ES was applied to the volar aspect of the treated forearm for 30 min three times a week, for 2 weeks. The effect of ES on skin vulnerability was investigated using 5% and 0.5% sodium lauryl sulfate (SLS) patches applied to both treated and control forearms. The skin response to irritants was evaluated using transepidermal water loss (TEWL) and a visual erythema score 24 h after patch removal. RESULTS: Compared to the control forearm, ES increased skin permeability and erythema in response to external irritants (SLS), as measured by the visual analog score (Z = 2.75, p = 0.006) and TEWL (p < 0.05), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: ES escalates skin reactions to low concentrations of irritant substances, such as SLS, in the area between the two electrodes. This emphasizes the use of this substance, and similar irritants should be avoided in areas treated with ES.

Jacquet erosive dermatitis associated with commercial barrier cream.

Jacquet erosive dermatitis (JED) is a rare, severe form of napkin dermatitis associated with friction and irritant exposure in the napkin area. The condition typically causes erosions and erythematous punched-out ulcerations. We present two cases of JED in infants associated with the use of a common brand barrier cream Curash. This appeared to present following a change of several active ingredients.

Botanical Briefs: Handling the Heat From Capsicum Peppers.

Capsicum peppers-including chili peppers, paprika, and red peppers-are native to the Americas but used worldwide in spicy dishes. Capsaicin, the active ingredient of Capsicum peppers, is used topically to treat musculoskeletal pain, neuropathy, and other conditions. Capsaicin binds the transient receptor potential vanilloid 1 (TRPV1), releasing substance P and desensitizing nerves with long-term use. Capsicum peppers and capsaicin products (eg, medications, cosmetics, pepper sprays) can provoke an irritant contact dermatitis, causing erythema and cutaneous burning. Capsaicin-induced dermatitis can be relieved by washing the area with soap, detergents, or oily compounds. Ice water or high-potency topical steroids also can help. Capsaicin is available in creams, lotions, and patches. Synthetic TRPV1-agonist injectables based on capsaicin are in clinical trials for use in localized pain. Capsaicin is a neuropeptide-active compound found in Capsicum peppers with many promising applications; however, dermatologists should be aware of possible skin reactions to these plants and medications derived from them.

Effects of impermeable and semipermeable glove materials on resolution of inflammation and epidermal barrier impairment after experimental skin irritation.

BACKGROUND: Semipermeable membranes might be suitable for glove liners or comfort gloves in individuals with irritant contact dermatitis (ICD). OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effects of different glove materials on inflammation and epidermal barrier impairment after experimental skin irritation. METHODS: Nine test areas on the volar forearms of 24 healthy volunteers were irritated with sodium lauryl sulfate (1%) and afterward covered for 6 days (6 or 8 h/day) with semipermeable Sympatex (SYM), vinyl (OCC), combinations of vinyl with Sympatex (SYM/OCC) or cotton (COT/OCC), or left uncovered (CON). Up to day 10, measurements of transepidermal water loss (TEWL), erythema (a*), skin humidity (SH) and visual scoring (VS) were applied. RESULTS: No significant differences in skin parameters were found between COT/OCC and SYM/OCC as well as between each of the combinations and CON. SYM, COT/OCC and SYM/OCC led to better results for most skin parameters than OCC alone. CONCLUSIONS: Occlusive material has a negative impact on skin barrier recovery and inflammation after skin irritation whereas SYM is not inferior to uncovered areas indicating good tolerability. Altogether, the data suggest that SYM is a useful alternative to COT as material for glove liners and comfort gloves in ICD patients.

Fibreglass dermatitis: diagnostic challenges and occupational interventions.

Fibreglass dermatitis is a common occupationally acquired irritant contact dermatitis, where small spicules of fibreglass lodging in the stratum corneum result in mechanical irritation. We present two patients, an air-conditioning ducting worker and an injection moulding machine operator, who both presented with generalized pruritus. In the first case, polarized microscopy of a skin biopsy specimen demonstrated rare small spicules, with a diameter of 1 µm, lodged in the stratum corneum. In the second case, skin tape stripping demonstrated fibreglass particles, not found on skin biopsy. Proper work practices, personal hygiene and use of impervious barrier materials were recommended. The first patient did not return for follow-up, and the second patient's dermatitis resolved after handling of fibreglass-containing material was eliminated from his job scope. In conclusion, we present two cases of fibreglass dermatitis to illustrate the challenges in diagnosis and highlight strategies for prevention.

Patch tests and hand eczema: retrospective study in 173 patients and literature review.

BACKGROUND: Hand eczema (HE) is a highly prevalent, recurrent, and multifactorial disease. It encompasses a group of eczematous diseases that affect the hands, etiologically classified into irritant contact dermatitis (ICD), allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and atopic dermatitis (AD). Few epidemiological studies in Latin America have investigated the characteristics of patients with this condition and the origin of the disease. OBJECTIVES: To analyze the profile of patients diagnosed with HE submitted to patch tests aiming to determine its etiology. METHODS: A retrospective descriptive study was carried out on epidemiological data and patch tests of patients with HE treated at a tertiary hospital in the city of São Paulo from January 2013 to December 2020. RESULTS: A total of 173 patients were studied, whose final diagnosis was 61.8% of ICD, 23.1% of ACD and 5.2% of AD, with diagnostic overlap in 42.8% of the cases. The main positive and relevant patch tests were: Kathon CG (42%), nickel sulfate (33%), and thiuram mix (18%). STUDY LIMITATIONS: The number of treated cases and socioeconomic profile was limited to a vulnerable population group. CONCLUSION: HE is a diagnosis in which overlapping etiologies are frequent, with the main sensitizers identified in ACD being Kathon CG, nickel sulfate and thiuram mix.

Botanical Briefs: Daffodils (Narcissus Species).

Daffodils (Narcissus species) are the most common cause of irritant contact dermatitis among florists. Calcium oxalate crystals contained in the sap of the daffodil plants lead to irritant contact dermatitis on the skin. Daffodil rash commonly presents with fissuring, scaling, and erythema of the fingertips, hands, and forearms. The best preventative measure is to wear appropriate protective gloves and clothing.

Irritant potential of different washing procedures used for heavy-duty soiling: Short and intense or longer and mild?

BACKGROUND: To prevent irritant contact eczema even in occupational fields with heavy-duty soiling, it is generally recommended to use 'mild' hand cleansers (mild detergent without grits, MC). On the other hand, since grit-containing cleansers (GC) show a higher washing power that minimizes washing time, their usage is generally preferred in specific occupational fields. OBJECTIVES: To compare whether a shorter, intense washing period might cause less skin damage than a longer washing period with an MC. METHODS: Differences in cleaning time were first verified in a pilot study using standardized model dirt. In the main study, the forearms of 35 healthy volunteers were washed with three standardized procedures over a period of 3 days, either using 2 min of MC with/without hand brush or 1-min GC. Clinical scoring, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), corneometry, colourimetry and scaliness/roughness (Visioscan) were used to evaluate the epidermal barrier, topography and irritation. RESULTS: The pre-study showed that washing time doubled when using MC vs. GC. Using GC resulted in stronger barrier disruption, even after a shorter washing period - median ΔT4-T1 TEWL 0.96 g/m2 /h vs. 4.91 g/m2 /h respectively, p < 0.0001. The most harmful procedure for the skin was the additional application of a hand brush (18.86 g/m2 /h). CONCLUSIONS: Short-time washing with GC damages the skin barrier more significantly in comparison to a longer application of an MC. When washing with MC, the strongest irritant reaction occurred when accompanied with hand brushing.

Applying skin protective cream and the wearing of gloves?-A randomized controlled experimental study.

BACKGROUND: Glove occlusion might enhance skin sensitivity to a subsequent detergent challenge (occlusion effect). Thus, some skin protection creams (PC) claim to protect against this effect of occlusion, and are recommended to be used before wearing liquid-proof gloves. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect of PC applied prior to glove occlusion on the 'occlusion effect'-refers to increased susceptibility of the skin to a model detergent. METHODS: One hundred and eleven volunteers were enrolled in a single-blind, randomized study. Seven PCs were applied before glove occlusion over 7 days (D1-D7). After sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS) challenge, we compared the irritation between the areas treated with PC and occlusion alone. Clinical scoring and bioengineering methods (capacitance, transepidermal water loss [TEWL], and colourimetry [erythema]) were used to quantify the irritant reactions. RESULTS: After 1 week of occlusion and PC application, we did not observe significant changes in TEWL, nor in erythema, whereas skin hydration raised in three cream-treated areas. On day 10, after a challenge with SLS, some products significantly aggravated the skin irritation as compared to occlusion alone. CONCLUSIONS: The 'occlusion effect'-shown as higher skin susceptibility to a model detergent-was not mitigated by PCs when applied prior to glove occlusion. On the contrary, some PCs might have negative effects on skin barrier function and augment such sensitivity.

Occupational Contact Dermatitis Caused by Artichokes.

Introduction: Few cases of skin diseases caused by exposure to artichokes have been published. Artichokes contain sesquiterpene lactones, which are known to be sensitizing. Irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) has also been diagnosed. To our knowledge, no protein contact dermatitis (PCD) has yet been reported to be induced by artichoke. Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify the different types of contact dermatitis that may be due to occupational exposure to artichokes and the professions concerned. Materials and Methods: We conducted a descriptive study, retrieving data from the French national database of occupational diseases for the period of 2001 to 2018. Results: Fifty-six cases were retrieved, and 10 cases were included in this study after data analysis and reading the clinical reports: 7 allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), 2 PCD, and 1 ICD caused by artichokes. Patients were farmers (4), agri-food workers (3), market gardener (1), cashier (1), and store employee (1). Conclusions: This is the first series of occupational contact dermatitis that can be induced by artichokes. Exposure to artichokes can lead to ICD, ACD, PCD, and perhaps contact urticaria. The sesquiterpene lactone mix patch test is not always sufficient to confirm an ACD by artichokes. Irritant contact dermatitis can be associated with ACD from artichokes or evolve on its own.

Work-related and personal risk factors for occupational contact dermatitis: A systematic review of the literature with meta-analysis.

The objective of this review is to identify work-related and personal risk factors for contact dermatitis (CD), and assess their association with this frequently occurring occupational disease. A systematic review of the literature from 1990 to June 2, 2020, was conducted using Medline and Embase. Prospective cohort and case-control studies were included, and meta-analyses were conducted when feasible. Quality of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation. Twenty-nine studies were identified, comprising 26 study populations and with a total of 846 209 participants investigating 52 risk factors for CD. Meta-analyses were performed for five risk factors, all of them for irritant contact dermatitis (ICD). Moderate-quality evidence was found for associations between wet work and ICD (OR: 1.56, 95%CI: 1.21-2.01). High-quality evidence was found for the association between atopic dermatitis and ICD (OR: 2.44, 95%CI: 1.89-3.15). There was no evidence for an association between ICD and sex or history of hand dermatitis, respiratory and mucosal atopy. In conclusion, several work-related and personal risk factors associated with CD were identified. Our data emphasize the need for the assessment of both, work-related and personal, risk factors to prevent occupational CD.

A systematic review of allergic and irritant contact dermatitis of the vulva: The most important allergens/irritants and the role of patch testing.

Vulvar allergic contact dermatitis (vACD) and irritant contact dermatitis (vICD) are common and accompanied by a great burden on the patient's life. We aimed to review the existing literature on vACD and vICD in order to provide a comprehensive reference list of potential vulvar allergens and irritants, as well as to establish the role of patch testing therein. A systematic search was performed in Medline, Embase and Web of Science using a search string based on the PICO-format. The study protocol was registered at PROSPERO (CRD42021239527). Multiple allergens were identified and included metals, topical drugs, fragrances, preservatives, cosmetic constituents and rubber components. Not all positive reactions were, however, considered to be relevant. Patch testing is the primary tool for the identification of the causal allergens. Testing with standard series alone was proven to be insufficient. Little information about irritants was found. In the future, additional series and late readings should be considered in standard practice. Studies on vICD are scarce and further research is necessary. More population-based research should be performed.

Presentations to emergency departments in Melbourne, Australia diagnosed as allergic contact dermatitis.

BACKGROUND: This study investigated cases diagnosed as allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in emergency departments (EDs) and management. METHODS: A multisite retrospective study of patients attending EDs in metropolitan Melbourne between July 2017 and June 2018 was performed. Using International Statistical Classification of Disease-10 (ICD-10) codes, the Victorian Agency for Health Information generated a list of cases of contact dermatitis (CD). Demographic and clinical data were analysed. RESULTS: Two hundred twenty-eighty patients from 14 different sites were diagnosed with ACD. Hair dyes caused the most cases, and one such case was admitted to hospital. It was apparent from the specified causes that cases of irritant CD were misdiagnosed as ACD. There were significant differences in management with dermatology input, with dermatologists more often advising oral corticosteroids (33.3% vs. 14.5%, P = 0.004) topical corticosteroids (92.9% vs. 38.7%, P < 0.01), emollients (38.1% vs. 20.4%, P = 0.01) and less often advising antihistamines (16.7% vs. 44.6%, P < 0.001). With dermatology input, potent or very potent steroids were more likely to be prescribed (69.3% vs. 11.1%, P < 0.001); without, a mild potency steroid was more likely to be prescribed (63.9% vs. 4%, P = 0.01). CONCLUSION: Improved understanding, diagnosis and management of CD are needed in EDs.