Reactions of non‐immunologic contact urticaria on scalp, face, and back

Abstract

Thus symptoms and measurements vary among sites. Differences may be related to solubility related percutaneous penetration. We encourage investigation into this relatively neglected but clinically important arena, to help explain difference in consumer/patient acceptance of topical formulations.

The definition, diagnostic testing, and management of chronic inducible urticarias - The EAACI/GA2LEN/EDF/UNEV consensus recommendations 2016 update and revision

“…Contact urticaria is divided into nonimmunologic contact urticaria (NICU), immunologic contact urticaria (ICU), and indeterminate if the mechanism is unclear. NICU can occur at the very first contact to the eliciting agent such as plants (e.g., stinging nettle), animals (e.g., jelly fish), or chemicals (e.g., cinnamon aldehyde) . NICU lesions are strictly limited to the areas where the eliciting agent came in contact to the skin.…”

Para-phenylenediamine allergy: current perspectives on diagnosis and management

“…The patient provided written informed consent including permission to use her pictures for this review. The scalp often fails to demonstrate visible inflammation,21 perhaps because it is shielded from dye by the hair itself. The severity of manifestations may vary from mild pruritus to prominent eyelid and facial edema, exudation, or blister formation.…”

Adapting epicutaneous patch testing protocols to assess immediate‐type skin reactions

“…The back was more sensitive to HN at low concentrations that the other two regions, but no differences were observed at higher concentrations. Clear cut differences in sensitivity were not observed for reactions with benzoic acid [11,12].…”