Reports on airborne dermatoses are mainly published in the context of occupational settings. Hence, in recent years, dermatologists and also occupational physicians have become increasingly aware of the airborne source of contact dermatitis, resulting mainly from exposure to irritants or allergens. However, their occurrence is still underestimated, because reports often omit the term ‘airborne’ in relation to dust or volatile allergens. For the present update, we screened the journals ‘Contact Dermatitis’ (July 2000 to December 2006); ‘Dermatitis’, formerly named ‘American Journal of Contact Dermatitis’; ‘La Lettre du Gerda’ (January 2000 to December 2006); and also included relevant articles from other journals published during the same period. This resulted in an updated list of airborne dermatitis causes.

No abstract

Methylmethacrylate was first reported in 1941 as a cause of contact dermatitis. Since then, occupational contact allergies to acrylates in dentistry, orthopedic surgery, printing industry and industry have been reported, but few reports are found in the literature as a consequence of the contact with sculptured artificial acrylic nails which are increasingly popular. We describe here 3 patients with contact allergy to acrylates in artificial sculptured nails. Patch tests were performed with the Portuguese baseline series of contact allergens and an extended series of acrylates were applied. In particular, we tested three female patients with allergic contact dermatitis from sculptured acrylic nails. Two of these patients were both customers and also technical nail beauticians. Two patients developed periungual eczema; one presented only with face and eyelid dermatitis had no other lesions. The tests showed positive reaction to 2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate (2-HEMA) and 2-hydroxypropylmethacrylate (2-HPMA) in all the three patients. Our cases demonstrate the variety of clinical presentations of allergic contact dermatitis from acrylic sculptured nails. They show the need to warn patients of persistent and sometimes permanent side effects of these products. They also emphasize the importance of cosmetic ingredient labeling.

No abstract

The frequency of positive reactions to MCI/MI reported in our study is in the middle range thus far reported in European series in the literature. MCI/MI is a very common biocide for use by the general public at the established allowed concentration, which has been subject of successive measures of regulation considering the compound's current nearly ubiquitous presence in cosmetics. Certain factors appear to increase the risk of sensitization, namely chronic dermatitis and the frequent use of leave-on products containing MCI/MI by these patients.