Cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia caused by cosmetic lip tattoo successfully treated with tacrolimus 0.1% ointment

Navarro‐Triviño, Francisco José; Naranjo-Díaz, M.J.; Ruíz‐Villaverde, Ricardo

doi:10.1111/cod.13726

Cited by 5 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 7 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Regarding treatment, tacrolimus has a long‐term anti‐inflammatory effect. 9 In this case, the patient responded well to topical tacrolimus 0.03% ointment (Figure 1 ). The therapies for different tattoo reactions are limited.…”

mentioning

confidence: 66%

Reflectance confocal microscopy as a tool for the diagnosis of labial foreign body granuloma caused by red tattoo pigment: A case report

Gao

Xiang

2022

Skin Research and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

mentioning

confidence: 66%

Reflectance confocal microscopy as a tool for the diagnosis of labial foreign body granuloma caused by red tattoo pigment: A case report

Gao

Xiang

2022

Skin Research and Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The non-microbiological adverse reactions that have been described in the context of semi-permanent make-up included 25 cases (across 19 case reports) of sarcoidosis-related reactions (Bashinskaya et al 2022, Bombonato et al 2015, Ebrahimiadib et al 2021, Gilhooley et al 2020, Hirai et al 2022, Huisman et al 2019, Ibraheim et al 2023, Iwayama et al 2017, Mirzaei et al 2017, Naeini et al 2017, Nie et al 2022, Tukenmez Demirci et al 2016, Valbuena et al 2017, Vera et al 2018, Tittelbach et al 2018); 17 cases of granulomatous reactions, including papules (Bashinskaya et al 2022, Ebrahimiadib et al 2021, Hinojosa et al 2017, Hirai et al 2022, Huisman et al 2019, Ibraheim et al 2023, Iwayama et al 2017, Leight-Dunn et al 2022, Maier et al 2015, Naeini et al 2017, Nie et al 2022, Suleman et al 2023, Sun & Lao 2023, Tittelbach et al 2018, Tukenmez Demirci et al 2016, Valbuena et al 2017); three cases of allergic reactions (Lahouel et al 2022, Ibraheim et al 2023, Motoki et al 2020), 19 cases of skin-related adverse reactions (Abtahi-Naeini et al 2019, Akoh et al 2021, Bashinskaya et al 2022, Ebrahimiadib et al 2021, Gilhooley et al 2020, Hinojosa et al 2017, Goldberg et al 2018, Hirai et al 2022, Maier et al 2015, Mirzaei et al 2017, Naeini et al 2017, Marcelino et al 2021, Navarro-Triviño et al 2021, Nie et al 2022, Sano et al 2021, Suleman et al 2023, Tierney & Kavanagh 2021, Tittelbach et al 2018, Vera et al 2018) and five cases of eye-related adverse reactions and other adverse reactions (Sano et al 2021, Goldberg et al 2018, Hinojosa et al 2017, Soltany et al 2023, Navarro-Triviño et al 2021).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A rapid review of physical health risks associated with special procedures (tattooing, body piercing, acupuncture, electrolysis)

Kiseleva,

Csontos,

Edwards

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Special procedures, such as tattooing (including semi-permanent make-up), body piercing, acupuncture and electrolysis involve piercing the skin and carry a potential risk of infection and other complications. This review provides an up-to-date evidence base on the main physical health risks associated with these special procedures.Searches were conducted for research published between 2015 and 2023. Where possible, existing reviews were used. For tattooing, one systematic review including 55 studies was identified. For semi-permanent make-up, 37 cases presented in 31 case reports were identified. For body piercing, four systematic reviews were identified, which covered 174 studies. For acupuncture, one evidence map of 535 systematic reviews without age limits and one overview of 24 systematic reviews focused on children were included. For electrolysis, one case report was identified.Complications and adverse events resulting from special procedures include fungal infections, bacterial infections, viral infections, blood-borne infections, allergic reactions, malignant growths, benign growths, sarcoidosis-related reactions, and a range of other skin and eye-related adverse reactions and dental issues.Research Implications and Evidence GapsMost of the primary evidence for the physical health risks associated with the special procedures came from case reports and case series, which do not allow causal inferences or provide information on the prevalence of adverse events. Future primary research should employ more robust designs to gather evidence about the causal links between special procedures and adverse physical health events as well as about the prevalence of such events in people receiving special procedures. More evidence is needed to identify physical health risks associated with electrolysis.Policy and Practice ImplicationsThe evidence contained in this review will be used to inform the training of local authority enforcement officers and special procedures practitioners and to educate members of the public who seek to use these services. Due to the nature of the special procedures which involves piercing the skin and poses the risk of introducing infections to the body, high standards of hygiene may reduce the rate of infection.Funding statementThe Wales Centre for Evidence Based Care, and the Specialist Unit for Review Evidence, were funded for this work by the Health and Care Research Wales Evidence Centre, itself funded by Health and Care Research Wales on behalf of Welsh Government.

show abstract

“…Both patients had PMU complications, one was a pseudolymphoma. 132,182 Pseudolymphomas in tattooing are usually restricted to a certain colour area and develop with a long delay of months or even years after tattooing. Histologically, these reactions predominantly involve T-lymphocytes, whereas B-lymphocytes are usually found in minor fractions only.…”

Section: Case Reports Of Patch Tested Tattoo Patientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Late readings might be useful, as two positive reactions to tattoo inks were recorded on D8 and D10. Both patients had PMU complications, one was a pseudolymphoma 132,182 . Pseudolymphomas in tattooing are usually restricted to a certain colour area and develop with a long delay of months or even years after tattooing.…”

Section: Patch Test Performance In Tattoo Patientsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Hypersensitivity to permanent tattoos: Literature summary and comprehensive review of patch tested tattoo patients 1997–2022

2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We outline constituents of tattoo and permanent make-up ink with regard to inflammatory tattoo reactions and population-based confounders. The comprehensive review of patch-tested tattoo patients between 1997 and 2022 shows that tattoo allergy cannot be reliably diagnosed via patch testing with today's knowledge. Weak penetration and slow haptenization of pigments, unavailability of pigments as test allergens and a lack of knowledge concerning relevant epitopes hamper the diagnosis of tattoo allergy. Patch testing p-phenylenediamine and disperse (textile) dyes is not able to close this gap. Sensitization to metals was associated with all types of tattoo complications, although often not clinically relevant for the tattoo reaction. Binders and industrial biocides are frequently missing on ink declarations and should be patch tested. The pigment carbon black (C.I. 77266) is no skin sensitizer. Patch tests with culprit inks were usually positive with cheap ink products for non-professional use or with professionally used inks in patients with eczematous reactions characterized by papules and infiltration. Tape stripping before patch testing and patch test readings on Day 8 or 10 may improve the diagnostic quality. The meaningfulness of the categorical EU-wide ban of Pigment Green 7 and Pigment Blue 15:3 is not substantiated by the presented data.

show abstract

Cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia caused by cosmetic lip tattoo successfully treated with tacrolimus 0.1% ointment

Cited by 5 publications

References 7 publications

Reflectance confocal microscopy as a tool for the diagnosis of labial foreign body granuloma caused by red tattoo pigment: A case report

Reflectance confocal microscopy as a tool for the diagnosis of labial foreign body granuloma caused by red tattoo pigment: A case report

A rapid review of physical health risks associated with special procedures (tattooing, body piercing, acupuncture, electrolysis)

Hypersensitivity to permanent tattoos: Literature summary and comprehensive review of patch tested tattoo patients 1997–2022

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About