Chromate dermatitis from a homeopathic drug

Ulsen, J. van; Stolz, E.; Joost, Theodoor van

doi:10.1111/j.1600-0536.1988.tb05496.x

Cited by 21 publications

(10 citation statements)

References 3 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our searches generated 378 articles, of which 340 had to be excluded (Figure 1). Thus, 35 reports met our eligibility criteria (5–40). Table 1 summarises direct AEs associated with the use of homeopathy.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The total number of patients amounted to 1159 (of those 1142 AEs were classified as direct and 17 as indirect AEs). The included articles originated from Austria, (5) Belgium, (20,31) Brazil, (16) Denmark, (23) France, (10,13,15) Germany, (36,38,40) Holland, (37) India, (32) Ireland, (18) Israel, (9,17,26) Italy, (11) Mexico, (29) Spain, (6,8,33) Sweden,(19) Switzerland, (25,39) UK(21,28) and the US (14,22,24). They were published between 1978 and 2010.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Adverse effects of homeopathy: a systematic review of published case reports and case series

Posadzki

Alotaibi

Ernst

2012

International Journal of Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Aim: The aim of this systematic review was to critically evaluate the evidence regarding the adverse effects (AEs) of homeopathy. Method: Five electronic databases were searched to identify all relevant case reports and case series. Results: In total, 38 primary reports met our inclusion criteria. Of those, 30 pertained to direct AEs of homeopathic remedies; and eight were related to AEs caused by the substitution of conventional medicine with homeopathy. The total number of patients who experienced AEs of homeopathy amounted to 1159. Overall, AEs ranged from mild‐to‐severe and included four fatalities. The most common AEs were allergic reactions and intoxications. Rhus toxidendron was the most frequently implicated homeopathic remedy. Conclusion: Homeopathy has the potential to harm patients and consumers in both direct and indirect ways. Clinicians should be aware of its risks and advise their patients accordingly.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Adverse effects of homeopathy: a systematic review of published case reports and case series

Posadzki

Alotaibi

Ernst

2012

International Journal of Clinical Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…A man experienced a severe exacerbation of his eczema after oral intake of a chromium-containing homeopathic drug (Pentackan Sinnabaun D4) prescribed as a hyposensitizing therapy for treating his chromium hypersensitivity [70]. A man experienced a severe exacerbation of his eczema after oral intake of a chromium-containing homeopathic drug (Pentackan Sinnabaun D4) prescribed as a hyposensitizing therapy for treating his chromium hypersensitivity [70].…”

Section: Metalsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hypersensitivity Reactions to Complementary and Alternative Medicine Products

Ventura¹,

Viola²,

Calogiuri³

et al. 2006

CPD

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Complementary and alternative medicine (CAM) is becoming increasingly popular, and is often used for treating hypersensitivity diseases. Virtually all alternative remedies can cause hypersensitivity reactions, but the most frequently involved ones are tea tree oil, members of the Compositae family, propolis, oils used in aromatherapy, substances responsible for photosensitization, and metal-containing compounds. The main target organ is skin, with manifestations ranging from contact dermatitis (the most common) to urticaria-angioedema, maculopapular eruptions, photosensitivity reactions, and the Stevens-Johnson syndrome. Other types of reactions are possible, including respiratory and anaphylactic ones. Different pathogenic mechanisms have been suggested for CAM product reactions, including immunologic ones. Basophils and mast cells participate in IgE-mediated reactions through the release of mediators like histamine and tryptase, whereas a T-cell-mediated pathogenic mechanism is involved in most delayed reactions, particularly contact dermatitis and maculopapular eruptions. Skin tests and serum specific IgE assays are carried out to diagnose immediate hypersensitivity reactions, while patch tests and lymphocyte transformation tests are usually performed to evaluate delayed hypersensitivity reactions. Thus clinicians should know about the potential of CAM products for causing adverse reactions. Our study is aimed at highlighting the risk of hypersensitive reactions to CAM remedies on the basis of the numerous cases reported in the literature. Because little is known about adverse reactions to CAM products, further systematic studies and an appropriate regulation by heath authorities are necessary.

show abstract

“…Chromate‐induced allergic contact dermatitis is mainly exacerbated following skin contact with hexavalent and trivalent chromium compounds (1), but the ingestion of the allergen in the dichromate form has also been reported to cause exacerbations (2–5). Oral ingestion of trivalent chromium, i.e.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%