Fragrance Series Testing in Eyelid Dermatitis

Wenk, Kurt S.; Ehrlich, Alison

doi:10.1097/der.0b013e31823d180f

Cited by 17 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This can be explained as in majority of our patients facial creams were suspected as offending agents. In our present study colophony was positive in 4.61% patients, which was in accordance with results obtained by Amin et al, (2) (4.3%), Cooper et al, (14) (3%), while Goosens et al, (11) found colophony to be positive in 7.29% and Kurt et al, (16) in 7%. The higher positivity may be due to a very large sample size in their studies.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

“…Fragrance mix was positive in 10.77% of patients in our study. Similar results were found by Feser et al, (16) in 11.5%, Goosens et al, (11) in 15.46% and Herro et al, (15) in 19.35%, while Valesschi et al, (7) in 8%, Reitshel et al, (12) in 7.1% and Cooper et al, (14) in 6% of…”

supporting

confidence: 79%

“…Vaccination is the possible cause of sensitization in early childhood so relevance of positive patch test needs to be evaluated carefully. Paraben mix positivity was seen in 4.61% patients, which was higher than observed by Kurt et al, (16) (in 2%) and Cooper et al, (14) in 0.4% of cases. This can be explained as in majority of our patients facial creams were suspected as offending agents.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 51%

See 2 more Smart Citations

A Study to Determine the Clinico-Etiological Factors in Eye Lid Dermatitis

D¹

2017

jmscr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 83%

supporting

confidence: 79%

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 51%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Study to Determine the Clinico-Etiological Factors in Eye Lid Dermatitis

D¹

2017

jmscr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…70 In seven studies in which patients with eyelid dermatitis or periorbital dermatitis were patch tested with MP, frequencies of sensitization ranged from 1.7% to 17%, but in five of the seven studies, the frequency was <7%. [72][73][74][75][76][77][78] In three investigations in which relevance was addressed, rates of relevant reactions were 43%, 77 58%, 78 and 75%, 74 but the culprit products were not mentioned. In four studies with a control group, the frequency of sensitization to MP was significantly lower than in routine testing.…”

Section: Relevance and Causative Productsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Myroxylon pereiraeresin (balsam of Peru) – A critical review of the literature and assessment of the significance of positive patch test reactions and the usefulness of restrictive diets

Groot¹

2019

Contact Dermatitis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article, contact allergy to Myroxylon pereirae resin (MP) (balsam of Peru) is reviewed. The topics presented include the uses, the chemical composition, the frequency of sensitization, the relevance of positive reactions, the MP-containing products causing allergic contact dermatitis, co-reactivity with other fragrance and nonfragrance materials, the sensitizers, the usefulness of MP as a "marker" of fragrance allergy, and the effectiveness of, and indications for, "balsam-restrictive" diets. Sensitization to MP occurs in 4% to 8% of patients routinely tested for suspected contact dermatitis. There are few adequate data on relevance. Topical pharmaceuticals were formerly, but are not today, important sources of sensitization. Cosmetics and foods or drinks are hardly ever products responsible for sensitization to MP. Positive patch test reactions in the large majority probably result from previous sensitization to MP constituents because of their presence in fragrances and fragranced products, MP thereby acting as marker (or "indicator") of fragrance allergy. However, fragrance mix I is a more sensitive marker, and the added diagnostic value of testing with MP is unknown. The allergenic ingredients of MP include isoeugenol, eugenol and cinnamyl alcohol, but there are other-largely unknown-chemicals that are responsible for contact allergy. Suggestions are given for further research to address questions thus far unanswered and to improve patient care. K E Y W O R D Sbalsam of Peru, balsam-restrictive diet, chemical composition, eugenol, cinnamyl alcohol, coniferyl benzoate, fragrance, isoeugenol, Myroxylon pereirae resin, perfume, fragrance marker, contact allergy

show abstract

“…Table 2 summarizes Among the fragrance allergens commonly implicated in ACD, fragrance mix I and mix II (Chemotechnique Diagnostics) have elicited an allergic response in 9.6 and 6 % of the general population, respectively [55]. Despite this response rate, Wenk et al found 36 % of their study population of patients with eyelid dermatitis to test positive for allergens in their supplemental fragrance series, even after a negative reaction to fragrances in the standard series [44]. Thus, the use of both the standard patch-testing series and a fragrance tray may be beneficial in determining the cause of ACD (Table 3).…”

Section: Patch Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Cosmeceutical Contact Dermatitis—Cautions To Herbals

Oliver

Krishnan

Pardo

et al. 2015

Curr Treat Options Allergy

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Monica Rengifo Pardo received support by an unrestricted education grant by Janssen ? This article is part of the Topical Collection on Contact Dermatitis Keywords Allergic contact dermatitis I Cosmetics I Cosmeceuticals I Natural remedies I Botanical products I Patch testing Opinion statement The global appeal of cosmetic products to the consumer is unmistakable, with a reach that extends virtually across every household in the USA. There has been increasing interest in natural remedies containing plant-based ingredients, popularly perceived to be less harmful than products made from synthetic chemical ingredients. The true prevalence of allergic reactions to cosmetics in the general population remains unknown, as reactions are often not reported because those affected simply discontinue use of the agent instead of seeking medical care. Herbal ingredients in cosmetics may be associated with allergic contact dermatitis, a type IV hypersensitivity reaction resulting in inflammatory skin eruptions characterized by pruritis, erythematous vesicles, and papules. Preservatives and fragrances are responsible for many cases of allergic contact dermatitis, but it is important for clinicians to recognize less common allergens and be suspicious of certain ingredients in plant-based products. This article aims to emphasize risks associated with use of cosmetics marketed as "natural" and to review specific botanical allergens implicated in causing allergic contact dermatitis. Key points 1. Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is a type IV (delayed) hypersensitivity reaction which can occur to naturally derived products. 2. Extracts derived from Compositae plants, propolis, and limonene, along with a number of essential oils and waxes, are popular in cosmetics and serve as botanical sources increasingly implicated in causing adverse skin reactions. 3. Pinpointing the allergen through patch testing and instituting avoidance measures is the definitive treatment for ACD.

show abstract

Fragrance Series Testing in Eyelid Dermatitis

Abstract: Our results suggest that there may be a significant benefit to fragrance series testing in patients with eyelid dermatitis. Fragrance tray inclusion in this population may identify additional cases of fragrance allergy that are missed by the standard series.

Cited by 17 publications

References 18 publications

A Study to Determine the Clinico-Etiological Factors in Eye Lid Dermatitis

A Study to Determine the Clinico-Etiological Factors in Eye Lid Dermatitis

Myroxylon pereiraeresin (balsam of Peru) – A critical review of the literature and assessment of the significance of positive patch test reactions and the usefulness of restrictive diets

Cosmeceutical Contact Dermatitis—Cautions To Herbals

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About