Suggestions regarding a more appropriate understanding of atopic dermatitis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The importance of consistency and accuracy of medical terminology must be recognized by all health care providers and researchers. Yet, recent publications by recognized authorities regarding atopic dermatitis seem to defy that basic tenet. I (an allergist/dermatologist) have (objectively) reviewed and (subjectively) interpreted the currently (peer reviewed) published designations etymologically, and some of their concepts scientifically. RECENT FINDINGS: Interdisciplinary, regional and international meetings have been discussing, assessing, and deliberating the newest data and observations, consistently realizing little consensus. The concluding trivial agreement denotes their individual bias. Given the same information, allergists, dermatologists, and generalists do not conceptualize, and yet dogmatically manage patients with atopic dermatitis. SUMMARY: Etymologically, and scientifically, atopic dermatitis can only be distinctively designated as the dermatologic syndrome, which heralds the atopic diathesis. Concomitantly, atopic dermatitis without atopy would be an oxymoron. Definitions based on anachronistic criteria demand updating. IgE, like eosinophilia, must be appreciated as epiphenomena of the transient Th1/Th2 cell reversal, which clearly differentiates 'atopic eczema' from all the 'other' eczemas. Failure to recognize the isomorphic feature of the eczema of atopic dermatitis denies patients with an essential therapeutic modality, namely 'Do not scratch, nor rub'. Education regarding the 'triggers' of itch would yield greater success (from recurrences), than prescribing immunomodulation.

Effects of glucocorticosteroids on the skin and eye.

The dermatologic anachronistic adage, "If wet--dry it, if dry--wet it!" has bee perhaps justifiably replaced by "Call the dermatologist to prescribe a steroid!" To say this without knowledge of the contents of this article and more importantly, to accept such cliches, is a disservice to the patient and a litigious liability to the prescriber. Recognizing the risk/benefit ratio of the most commonly used anti-inflammatory agents is essential. All therapies are most effective when used for their specific diagnosis. This article attempts to provide an update on the geometrically progressing knowledge regarding the uses and misuses of GCSs for the eye and skin.

Urticaria: reassessed.

Urticaria is a common symptom--it is not a single disease. Patients present knowing what caused their "hives" or not knowing the cause of their hives. The latter patients present to the physician expecting to find a cause--but it is extremely rare that a single cause is discovered; however, a search for identifiable "triggers" should be sought in the history. Routine laboratory investigations are consistently disappointing (unless appropriate testing is suggested by the history). The term idiopathic can be added only when a single putative cause is not discovered. Fortunately, all urticarias eventually resolve (spontaneously). All treatment is palliative. Antihistamines remain the first-line of therapy, the more H1-receptors blocked, the better the results (the majority of patients with urticaria are "undertreated"). Rarely are steroids warranted for management. A review of the evaluation and management of patients with persistent urticaria without an identifiable cause is presented.

Occupational dermatoses.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: All terms referring to job-related (occupational) rashes are clearly defined. Ranking as the second most common occupational disorder, the importance of occupational dermatoses is illustrated. RECENT FINDINGS: 90-95% of occupational dermatoses result from a contact-type dermatitis. Until recently, 4/5 cases were believed to be of the irritant, rather than allergic type of contact dermatitis, however, with more extensive patch testing, more than half the cases were found to be allergic. SUMMARY: The direct causes of occupational dermatoses: chemical, mechanical, physical, and biological in nature are presented. The implications of assigning the degree and type of occupational dermatoses are explained. Workmans compensation is based on a no-fault arrangement, stating that unrestricted treatment and compensation is allowable only when negligence on the part of the employer is proven. Employee benefits are then determined by the duration and degree of disability sustained - all of which becomes litigational. Predisposing host factors, i.e. intellectual ability, anatomic site, atopy, skin pigmentation, age of skin, and immunosuppression (by disease or medication) are usually ignored. Environmental factors at the workplace must be considered conducive to occupational diseases. The full spectrum of irritant contact dermatitis is discussed with examples of each described. Allergic contact dermatitis and patch testing - the gold standard for identification of putative allergens is extensively discussed. Differentiating irritant contact dermatitis from allergic contact dermatitis is elucidated. The other non-contact type skin reactions are briefly mentioned.

Atopic dermatitis.

Atopic dermatitis, the dermatologic manifestation of the atopic diathesis, has a variety of clinical presentations. This disease probably should be considered a syndrome--a group of signs and symptoms that frequently occur together in an identifiable pattern. The following update describes the spectrum of atopic dermatitis and summarizes current thinking about the etiology of the disease.

An overview of chronic urticaria.

Acknowledging urticaria as a symptom of mast cell degranulation is stressed. The biology of the mast cell, and the recognized immunologic and non-immunologic mast cell secretagogues are individually discussed along with mechanisms of activation and mediators released. The major, preformed mediator histamine in the skin produces a prototypic, short-lived urticaria, however, the clinical spectrum and pattern of "hives" indicate that other mediators contribute to the polymorphism and variable behavior of this symptom. The clinical assessment is almost exclusively restricted to the history and physical examination. Features to review and examine are presented. The cause of "acute" urticaria is identifiable (by history) in the majority of patients, and except for hives that accompany an anaphylactic reaction, these patients rarely present to the physician for care. The persistent, or "chronic" hiver whose history cannot elicit a cause, is rarely triggered by an individual trigger, despite extensive professional evaluation. Evidence to support changing the chronological, "acute" and "chronic" classification of urticaria to "identifiable" and "non-identifiable" triggered urticaria is discussed, as is the futility of extensive, costly laboratory work-ups. The natural history of urticaria reveals that management should be directed toward allowing the patient to maintain an acceptable quality of life (with or without some urticaria), until the episode resolves.

Pruritic dermatoses: overview of etiology and therapy.

This review begins with a brief survey of the neurophysiology and neuroanatomy of pruritus, and goes on to describe the etiology of the major allergic and nonallergic pruritic disorders. The etiology of pruritus often suggests the appropriate treatment. For example, urticaria, which is primarily mediated by histamine, is amenable to treatment with H1 antihistamines. Second-generation, nonsedating antihistamines appear to be more effective than sedating antihistamines, perhaps because of better compliance. Other systemic pharmacologic options may be useful in nonhistamine-mediated disorders, for example, immunomodulators for inflammation-induced pruritus or opiate antagonists for atopic dermatitis. Nonpharmacologic measures, such as proper skin care, and physical modalities, such as phototherapy or acupuncture, may also be helpful.