重庆地区193例化妆品变应性接触性皮炎患者斑贴试验结果分析

 目的:分析重庆地区化妆品变应性接触性皮炎患者主要化妆品成分变应原,以便指导患者合理选择和使用化妆品,降低皮炎的发生率。方法:选取我院皮肤科门诊确诊为化妆品变应性接触性皮炎的193例患者进行化妆品成分斑贴试验,并对结果作统计学分析。结果:斑贴试验总阳性率为69.43%,合并2种及2种以上变应原的患者占50.26%,阳性率前5位的变应原分别为硫柳汞、十二烷基硫酸钠、尼泊金酯、三乙醇胺和乙二胺;女性斑贴试验阳性率为73.33%,明显高于男性,差异有统计学意义(X²=9.67,P<0.05）;青年组明显高于其他年龄组,差异有统计学意义（ X²=36.79,P<0.05）。结论：硫柳汞、十二烷基硫酸钠、尼泊金酯、三乙醇胺和乙二胺5种物质是重庆地区化妆品变应性接触性皮炎患者主要的致敏成分。化妆品变应性接触性皮炎患者以女性为主,中青年多见。     

化妆品变应性接触性皮炎93例临床分析

目的了解化妆品变应原的种类,为预防化妆品过敏提供流行病学资料和临床依据。方法对疑似有接触过敏史的患者做斑贴试验和进行问卷调查。结果共入选599例,其中93例为临床诊断为化妆品变应性接触性皮炎,48例为试验确证为化妆品变应性接触性皮炎,面霜和染发剂是主要的过敏化妆产品。结论对苯二胺、芳香混合物、阿莫醇和阿必醇是化妆品变应性接触性皮炎的主要致敏原。     

职业性变应性接触性皮炎临床和斑贴试验分析

目的:分析职业性变应性接触性皮炎(OACD)患者临床特征和致敏变应原.方法:对可疑患者进行标准系列变应原斑贴试验.结果:共诊断7例OACD.6例患者怀疑皮炎可能与工作环境有关.常见职业致敏变应原为镍、秋兰姆混合物、环氧树脂和对苯二胺.结论:标准系列变应原斑贴试验可以确定常见职业变应原.     

534例变应性接触性皮炎斑贴试验结果分析

目的:了解变应性接触性皮炎常见的过敏原。方法:采用瑞敏斑贴试验器,对2011年2月至2015年7月到我院就诊的534例变应性接触性皮炎患者进行斑贴试验,并对试验结果进行统计分析。结果:534例受试者中1项或1项以上阳性反应的有471例,总阳性率88.20%。阳性反应率较高的变应原依次是:重铬酸钾(61.78%)、氯化钴(53.29%)、硫酸镍(43.10%)、芳香混合物(34.61%)、卡巴混合物(33.33%)。结论:重铬酸钾、氯化钴、硫酸镍、芳香混合物、卡巴混合物是本地变应性接触性皮炎的常见过敏原。斑贴试验是检测变应性接触性皮炎过敏原安全、有效、简便的方法。     

287例变应性接触性皮炎患者斑贴试验结果分析

目的：了解本地区变应性接触性皮炎（ACD）患者常见变应原。方法：采用由瑞典化学诊断AB公司研发生产的中国筛查系列CH-1000对287例ACD患者进行斑贴试验。结果：287例ACD患者中有139例阳性,阳性率48.4%,与健康对照组（阳性率6.7%）相比较,其差异有统计学意义（P〈0.05）,最常见5种变应原依次为：硫酸镍、芳香混合物、氯化钴、CL＋Me异-噻唑（卡松CG）、卡巴混合物。结论：斑贴试验是明确ACD患者变应原的一种安全、有效的方法。     

关于接触性皮炎斑贴试验标准抗原的研究

按照TROLAB欧洲标准抗原(简称欧抗)的成分和浓度,用国产试剂配制了一套仿制抗原(筒称仿抗).通过显微镜下对仿抗中12种抗原颗粒分布均匀性及颗粒大小这两项质量指标的检测,并与欧抗进行对比.又通过临床204例皮炎患者两套抗原同时斑试对比,结果证实仿抗完全达到欧抗质量水平.临床204例欧抗斑试总阳性率为58.33%,其中阳性率在2%以上的有13种抗原.对85例欧抗斑试阴性者中36例还根据病史进行可疑物斑试.     

326例接触性皮炎和湿疣患者斑贴试验分析

本科应用瑞典化学技术诊断AB公司提供的斑贴试验标准试剂对326例接触性皮炎和湿疹患进行斑贴试验。阳性率为57.36%。阳性率高的抗原依次为硫酸镍,重铬酸钾,4-苯二胺,芳香混合物,氯化钴和硫柳汞,接触性皮炎组的斑试阳性率显高于湿疹组（P<0.01)。斑试阳性结果与临床接触史的符合率为82.35%,结果提示发生在头面部的皮炎,湿疹应考虑化妆品,染发剂过敏的可能,而发生于手部的皮炎,湿疹应首先考虑刺激性因素所致。     

季节性接触性皮炎的花粉斑贴试验报告

引起接触性皮炎的原因很多,吸入性变应原的花粉是其中原因之一。花粉是一种大分子物质[1]与,一般性变态反应接触性皮炎的抗原(分子量小于10ＫＤ)有差异。本文用花粉变应原在季节性接触性皮炎的病人进行斑贴试验。现报告如下。资料及方法临床资料　临床诊断依据[2]:(1)鲜花盛开期,急性发作,好发于面、手部,皮损呈红斑、水肿,红斑上覆针头大丘疹;(2)排除其它因素引起的急性皮炎;(3)无光敏感。临床符合上述标准者共15例(女11,男4),年龄20～40岁,平均33.27岁。病程1～10年,皮损于面部12例,手部2例,面和手部1例。方法　(1)花粉斑贴试验方法:花粉…     

脐周变应性接触性皮炎121例斑贴试验结果分析

目的探讨脐周变应性接触性皮炎的致敏原特点。方法采用斑贴试验分析121例脐周变应性接触性皮炎患者的致敏原。结果斑贴试验结果主要的致敏原是硫酸镍98.35%,白降汞18.18%,重铬酸钾17.36%,橡胶Ⅳ(促进剂:D.P.G.TMTD混合物)8.26%,新霉素7.44%和对苯二胺5.79%。结论硫酸镍是脐周变应性接触性皮炎最主要的致敏原。     

用可疑化妆品对化妆品皮炎作斑贴试验的研究

为了研究用化妆品进行斑贴试验时所需浓度，探讨用患者使用过的可疑化妆品进行斑贴试验在诊断化妆品皮炎中的应用价值，将各种化妆品以不同浓度对３５例健康者，３８例非接触性皮炎湿疹类患者进行斑贴试验。然后用患者各自的可疑致敏化妆品对６２例化妆品皮炎患者进行斑贴试验。结果：初步认为护肤类膏剂、唇膏、护发类发乳、头油、摩丝等类产品可用原物进行斑贴试验，染发剂、清洁类香皂、护发类油用２％，清洁类香波用２％和５％，冷烫精、指甲油、香水用５％或１０％。可疑化妆品斑贴试验的阳性率为９５．１６％。本研究表明：用可疑化妆品作斑贴试验时，不同类型的产品，其斑贴试验浓度并不相同，用患者的可疑化妆品进行斑贴试验是诊断化妆品皮炎的重要手段。这项研究为进一步研究我国化妆品皮炎标准筛选系列抗原提供了必要资料。     

标准筛选系列抗原在化妆品皮炎诊断中的应用

１５３例化妆品皮炎患者应用标准筛选抗原斑贴试验，变态反应性阳性１１０例，刺激性反应４例，阳性率为７４．５％。引起化妆品皮炎的主要抗原为芳香混合物、对苯二胺、硫酸镍、松香、氯化钴、秘鲁香油、甲醛及羊毛醇。本研究提示：筛选抗原斑贴试验在我国化妆品皮炎的诊断上有较大的实用价值。     

51例面部化妆品接触性皮炎的斑贴试验和光斑贴试验结果分析

目的:检测分析面部化妆品接触性皮炎患者常见致敏原。方法:回顾性分析我院面部化妆品接触性皮炎患者的临床资料、斑贴试验和光斑贴试验资料。结果:51例患者进行了斑贴试验,总体阳性率为96%。阳性率高的过敏源依次为：硫酸镍(47.1%)、氯化钴(35.3%)、甲基异噻唑啉酮(27.5%)、纺织染料混合物(19.6%)、没食子酸辛酯(19.6%)、松香(13.7%)、对苯二胺(13.7%)、硫柳汞(13.7%)、叔丁基氢醌(13.7%)、棓酸十二烷酯(13.7%)。46例患者完成光敏实验和光斑贴检查,14例存在光敏感(30.43%);其中UVA敏感7例(15.22%),UVB敏感8例(17.39%)。光斑贴阳性率19.6%,常见致敏原依次为：依托酚那酯(6.5%)、癸基葡糖苷(6.5%)、甲酚曲唑三硅氧烷(4.3%)。结论:防腐剂、香料、重金属、乳化剂、抗氧化剂、表面活化剂等原料均可能引起面部接触致敏。面部化妆品皮炎患者还可能存在光敏反应和光变态反应。全面的斑贴试验有助于更好的帮助患者查找致敏原。     

Allergic contact dermatitis due to phenylephrine hydrochloride, with an unusual patch test reaction

2-day (2-D) closed patch tests are often used in daily clinical practice and useful for evaluating the cause of allergic contact dermatitis. However, even when 2-D closed patch tests at appropriate concentrations are performed for suspected allergic contact dermatitis based on clinical findings, positive reactions are not always obtained. Therefore, although the use of the allergen again induces similar symptoms, a definite diagnosis cannot be made in some cases. We report a case of allergic contact dermatitis due to phenylephrine hydrochloride in eyedrops, with an unusual patch test reaction. Although the results of the routine 2-D closed patch test were negative, a definite diagnosis could be made by closed scratch-patch test. In addition, long-lasting allergic patch test reactions were observed at the positive scratch-patch test site for about 3 months. We speculated that these unusual results on patch testing in our case were associated with the degree of percutaneous absorption of causative agents. Therefore, even when 2-D closed patch tests are negative, scratch-patch tests may be indicated for patients in whom clinical symptoms continue strongly to suggest contact dermatitis.     

A clinical and patch test study of contact dermatitis from traditional Chinese medicinal materials

Putative allergens in, clinical manifestations of, and patch tests with traditional Chinese medicinal materials (CMM) causing contact dermatitis (CD) were studied. 14 patients with CMM CD and 351 controls were patch tested with the standard series of allergens of Beijing Medical University and the suspected drug, as is. It was found that most CMM CD was caused by the CMM frequently used topically for analgesic and anti-inflammatory effect. All patients patch tested with the suspected drug gave positive results. Some patients also reacted to fragrance mix. Colophony, rubber mix and ammoniated mercury. The positively rates of fragrance mix and colophony in CMM CD patients were significantly higher than in controls (55.6% versus 16.5% for fragrance mix, X ²= 11. 86, P < 0.01; and 55.6% versus 5.1% for colophony, X ²= 29.35. P < 0.01), while not those of rubber mix and ammoniated mercury. Results indicated that the topical analgesic and anti-inflammatory CMM, especially those containing fragrance, may cause contact sensitization. Clinical findings in CMM CD included cutaneous irritation, allergic contact dermatitis. immediate contact reactions and systemic contact dermatitis. CMM CD can he diagnosed by patch testing the putative drug, as is.     

Multicenter study of preservative sensitivity in patients with suspected cosmetic contact dermatitis in Korea

As many new cosmetic products are introduced into the market, attention must be given to contact dermatitis, which is commonly caused by cosmetics. We investigate the prevalence of preservative allergy in 584 patients with suspected cosmetic contact dermatitis at 11 different hospitals. From January 2010 to March 2011, 584 patients at 11 hospital dermatology departments presented with cosmetic contact dermatitis symptoms. These patients were patch-tested for preservative allergens. An irritancy patch test performed on 30 control subjects using allergens of various concentrations showed high irritancy rates. Preservative hypersensitivity was detected in 41.1% of patients. Allergens with the highest positive test rates were benzalkonium chloride (12.1%), thimerosal (9.9%) and methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone (MCI/MI) (5.5%). Benzalkonium chloride and chlorphenesin had the highest irritancy rate based on an irritancy patch test performed using various concentrations. Seven of 30 normal subjects had a positive irritant patch reading with 0.1% benzalkonium chloride and eight of 30 normal subjects had a positive irritant patch reading at 4 days with 0.5% chlorphenesin in petrolatum. Although benzalkonium chloride was highly positive for skin reactions in our study, most reactions were probably irritation. MCI/MI and thimerosal showed highly positive allergy reactions in our study. The optimum concentration of chlorphenesin to avoid skin reactions is less than 0.5%.