Allergic contact dermatitis in children

INTRODUCTION: Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is equally as likely in infancy as in adulthood, and represents 20% of all cases of dermatitis in children. Its true prevalence and incidence are, however, unknown. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We have conducted a retrospective study over 10 years of a group of patients aged 15 years or less, with clinical suspicion of ACD. Patch tests were performed in accordance with the standards of the GEIDC. RESULTS: The study covered 96 patients with a mean age of 10.57+/-0.67 years. The zones most frequently affected by eczemas were those of diffuse distribution (28% of patients) and of the hands (27%). We found at least one positive response in 52% of the cases. The most frequent allergens were thiomersal (21%), mercury (19%) and nickel (18%). We have found a statistically significant association between age of less than 15 years and positive response to thiomersal [P<0.01; OR: 8.5 with confidence interval (CI) 95%: 5.08相似文献   

Allergic contact dermatitis in children

The authors report a study of allergic contact dermatitis in 329 Portuguese children of 14 years or younger. 170 children (64 male and 106 female) reacted to 1 or more allergens. Most of these were in the 11-14 years group. The main allergens were nickel, thimerosal, cobalt, mercury, fragrance-mix and potassium dichromate. Nickel reactivity predominated in females over the whole group, but a greater number of males younger than 5 years reacted to nickel. The number of positive reactions increased with age, but this was not accompained by an increase in the % of relevant tests. 12 children, all of them 13 or 14 years-old, had an occupational allergic contact dermatitis.     

Allergic contact dermatitis in children: a practical approach to management

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) may account for at least 20% of all childhood dermatitis. Clinically, its morphology is identical to other forms of dermatitis in acute, subacute and chronic forms. A persistent or unusual and localized pattern is often the key to diagnosis. Treatment has centered around the use of corticosteroids, with the adjunct of antihistamines, wet dressings, and emollients for alleviation of symptoms. The newer topical immunosuppressives, tacrolimus and pimecrolimus, may also hold promise as alternative therapies, although they have not been well-studied in this regard. Allergen identification, sometimes through patch testing and allergen avoidance are the keys to preventing recurrences of this disease.     

Allergic contact dermatitis in children and adolescents

From a clinical point of view, the prevalence of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) among children and adolescents seems to be low. However, many children have dermatitis, most often atopic dermatitis. In selected cases, ACD is suspected, and the child is tested. The question remains, whether the prevalence of ACD in children really is low or whether the possibility of ACD is not sufficiently considered. During the last decade, reports have appeared on series of children and adolescents with contact allergy and ACD. Few cases have been reported in infants, but the development of contact allergy and ACD increases with age. Most studies include selected groups of children and adolescents with suspected ACD. Few studies have examined unselected populations, and most consider only the prevalence of contact allergy without evaluating the clinical relevance, e.g., the prevalence of ACD. Furthermore, no follow-up studies exist. Therefore, the incidence and prevalence of contact allergy and ACD in children and adolescents is largely unknown.     

Allergic contact dermatitis in children and young adults

We evaluated the results of a 5-year period of epicutaneous testing in children and teenagers younger than 16 years of age. In an overall-tested population of 2671 persons, 67 were younger than 16 years. In 16 (23.8%) of these 67 children, a positive epicutaneous test was considered to be clinically relevant for the diagnosis allergic contact dermatitis. From the total of 44 positive tests, the most common allergen was nickel sulfate (18%), followed by balsam of Peru, Carba mix, colophony, and fragrance mix (6% each). As our test population consisted of only a few children, no conclusions were drawn in respect to children younger than 10 years. Despite our careful selection of children with allergic contact dermatitis, the prevalence of positive epicutaneous tests was no different than that reported for unselected populations of children.     

Allergic contact dermatitis

Contact dermatitis is an inflammatory skin condition induced by exposure to an environmental agent. Eczema and dermatitis are used synonymously to denote a polymorphous pattern of skin inflammation characterized at least in its acute phase by erythema, vesiculation and pruritus. Substances responsible for contact dermatitis after single or multiple exposures are non protein chemicals, i.e. haptens, that induce skin inflammation through activation of innate skin immunity (irritant contact dermatitis) or both innate and acquired specific immunity (allergic contact dermatitis). The present review will focus on allergic contact dermatitis, a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction, which is mediated by hapten-specific T cells. Recent advances in the pathophysiology of ACD have shown that the occurrence of ACD, as well as its magnitude and duration, is controlled by the opposite functions of CD8 effector T cells and CD4 regulatory T cells. From these studies ACD can be considered as a breakdown of cutaneous immune tolerance to haptens.     

Allergic contact dermatitis

Allergic contact dermatitis is a frequent inflammatory skin disease. The suspected diagnosis is based on clinical symptoms, a plausible contact to allergens and a suitable history of dermatitis. Differential diagnoses should be considered only after careful exclusion of any causal contact sensitization. Hence, careful diagnosis by patch testing is of great importance. Modifications of the standardized test procedure are the strip patch test and the repeated open application test. The interpretation of the SLS (sodium lauryl sulfate) patch test as well as testing with the patients' own products and working materials are potential sources of error. Accurate patch test reading is affected in particular by the experience and individual factors of the examiner. Therefore, a high degree of standardization and continuous quality control is necessary and may be supported by use of an online patch test reading course made available by the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group. A critical relevance assessment of allergic patch test reactions helps to avoid relapses and the consideration of differential diagnoses. Any allergic test reaction should be documented in an allergy ID card including the INCI name, if appropriate. The diagnostics of allergic contact dermatitis is endangered by a seriously reduced financing of patch testing by the German statutory health insurances. Restrictive regulations by the German Drug Law block the approval of new contact allergens for routine patch testing. Beside the consistent avoidance of allergen contact, temporary use of systemic and topical corticosteroids is the therapy of first choice.     

Allergic contact dermatitis: Sex differences

Using the repeated insult test, Jordan & King (1977) observed that contact sensitization was more readily induced in females than in males. We reviewed data obtained by maximization testing of 185 test substances of which 73 were allergenic. The overall male-female sensitization rates were respectively 9.9 and 9.2%. Only with the weakest allergens (sensitizing one or two subjects of a 25-member panel) was there a possibility of female predominance in that there were twice as many panels having only female reactors as males exclusively. In these instances, the test agents were mainly fragrances. We have concluded that sex differences, in the prevalence of sensitization to particular substances, reflect past exposure and are not due to sex differences.     

Allergic contact dermatitis in Iran

The frequency of sensitization to contact allergens varies in different countries because of both genetic and, more importantly, allergen exposure variations. The objective is to determine the frequency of sensitization to contact allergens in Iranian patients with dermatitis. 250 patients with a clinical diagnosis of contact dermatitis and/or atopic dermatitis were evaluated with a 28-allergen screening series recommended by the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group from September 2002 to April 2004 in Tehran, Iran. The patches were applied on the back of the patients, removed after 24 hr and the readings were taken on 24 hr, 48 hr and 72 hr after application. 126 patients (50.4%) showed at least 1 positive reaction, and 23 patients (9.2%) had more than 2 positive reactions. 189 (84.4%) of 224 positive reactions had past and/or present clinical relevance. The 5 most common allergens were nickel sulfate 70 (28.0%), cobalt chloride 32 (12.8%), para-tertiarybutyl phenol formaldehyde resin 20 (8.0%), potassium dichromate 13 (5.2%) and colophony 13 (5.2%). Contact allergy to nickel sulfate was significantly more common in female patients and in patients under 40 years of age (P < 0.05). Nickel sulfate is the most common contact allergen in Iran, mostly affecting women and younger patients probably because of more exposure.     

Allergic contact dermatitis in dentistry

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in dentistry may affect dentists and orthodontists, technicians, nurses and patients. Changes to dental practice in recent years have altered the reported frequencies of allergens causing ACD in both dental personnel and patients. Allergic contact dermatitis to medicaments, metals and glutaraldehyde were previously common allergens in dentistry; however, widespread adoption of rubber gloves by staff has resulted in a significant increase in ACD to glove allergens in both dental staff and their patients, while affording protection against the traditional allergens. Both public concerns about potential toxicity of metals in oral restorations and a greater demand for cosmetic dentistry, have resulted in greater use of acrylics and resins by dental personnel, exposing them to highly allergenic materials. Dermatologists need to be aware of the newer allergenic materials used in dentistry in order to correctly manage skin diseases in this high-risk group.