Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Contact Dermatitis pp 1107–1119Cite as

Patch Testing with the Patients’ Own Products

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

Abstract

Patch testing with the baseline series may detect only 40–70% of the responsible allergens in the diagnosis of contact dermatitis. Using additional commercially available test series will detect another 25% of the relevant allergens. Only about 10% will be recognized, if the patient´s own materials are patch tested. In this chapter, detailed guidelines for various products will be given: cosmetics (leave on and wash-off type), hair dressing, disinfecting agents, clothing, plants, construction materials, metal working fluids etc. The test concentration is crucial, because some of these materials are irritants and may even cause necrotic reactions, if tested undiluted. Before testing, detailed information about chemistry, pH, toxicity, and sensitization properties should be obtained. A semi-open test without occlusion is helpful for materials with irritant potential. A dilution series, control testing on informed volunteers, and repeated open application tests have frequently identified new contact allergens in various occupations and in products contacting the skin in daily life.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   299.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Menné T, Dooms-Goossens A, Wahlberg JE, White IR, Shaw S (1992) How large a proportion of contact sensitivities are diagnosed with the European standard series? Contact Dermatitis 26:201–202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Nettis E, Marcandrea M, Colonardi MC, Paradiso MT, Ferrannini TA (2003) Results of standard series patch testing in patients with occupational allergic contact dermatitis. Allergy 58:1304–1307

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Daecke CM (1994) Der Stellenwert patienteneigener Testsubstanzen bei der Epikutantestung. Hautarzt 45:292–298

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Balzer C, Schnuch A, Geier J, Uter W (2005) Ergebnisse der Epikutantestung mit patienteneigenen Kosmetika und Körperpflegemittel im IVDK, 1998–2002. Dermatol Beruf Umwelt 53:8–24

    Google Scholar 

  5. Uter W, Balzer C, Geier J, Frosch PJ, Schnuch A (2005) Patch testing with patients’ own cosmetics and toiletries – results of the IVDK, 1998–2002. Contact Dermatitis 53:226–233

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Jolanki R, Estlander T, Alanko K, Kanerva L (2000) Patch testing with a patient’s own materials handled at work. In: Kanerva L, Elsner P, Wahlberg JE, Maibach HI (eds) Handbook of occupational dermatology. Springer, Berlin, pp 375–383

    Google Scholar 

  7. Goossens A, Detienne T, Bruze M (2002) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by isocyanates. Contact Dermatitis 47:304–308

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Frick M, Zimerson E, Karlsson D et al (2004) Poor correlation between stated and found concentration of diphenylmethane-4, 4´-diisocyanate (4, 4´-MDI) in petrolatum patch-test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 51:73–78

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Giménez Arnau E, Andersen KE, Bruze M, Frosch PJ, Johansen JD, Menné T, Rastogie SE, White IR, Lepoittevin JP (2000) Identification of Lilial® as a fragrance sensitizer in a perfume by bioassay-guided chemical fractionation and structure-activity relationships. Contact Dermatitis 43:351–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Mutterer V, Giménez Arnau E, Lepoittevin JP, Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Menné T, Andersen KE, Bruze M, Rastogi SC, White IR (1999) Identification of coumarin as the sensitizer in a patient sensitive to her own perfume but negative to the fragrance mix. Contact Dermatitis 40:196–199

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lange-Ionescu S, Bruze M, Gruvberger B, Zimerson E, Frosch PJ (2000) Kontaktallergie durch kohlefreies Durchschlagpapier. Dermat Beruf Umwelt 48:183–187

    Google Scholar 

  12. Magerl A, Heiss R, Frosch PJ (2001) Allergic contact dermatitis from zinc ricinoleate in a deodorant and glyceryl ricinoleate in a lipstick. Contact Dermatitis 44:119–121

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Magerl A, Pirker C, Frosch PJ (2003) Allergisches Kontaktekzem durch Schellack und 1, 3-Butylenglykol in einem Eyliner. J Dtsch Dermatolog Ges 1:300–302

    Google Scholar 

  14. Uter W, Balzer C, Geier J, Schnuch A, Frosch PJ (2005) Ergebnisse der Epikutantestung mit patienteneigenen Parfüms, Deos und Rasierwässern. Ergebnisse des IVDK 1998–2002. Dermatol Beruf Umwelt 53:25–36

    Google Scholar 

  15. Henriks-Eckerman M, Suuronen K, Jolanki R, Alanko K (2004) Methacrylates in dental restorative materials. Contact Dermatitis 50:233–237

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Uter W, Geier J, Lessmann H, Schnuch A (1999) Unverträglichkeitsreaktionen gegen Körperpflege- und Haushaltsprodukte: Was ist zu tun? Die Informations- und Dokumentationsstelle für Kontaktallergien (IDOK) des Informationsverbundes Dermatologischer Kliniken (IVDK). Deutsche Dermatologe 47:211–214

    Google Scholar 

  17. Vigan M (1997) Les nouveaux allergenes des cosmetiques. La cosmetovigilance. Ann Dermatol Venereol 124:571–575

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Herbst RA, Uter W, Pirker C, Geier J, Frosch PJ (2004) Allergic and non-allergic periorbital dermatitis: patch test results of the Information Network of the Departments of Dermatology during a 5-year period. Contact Dermatitis 51:13–19

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Dooms-Goossens A (1995) Patch testing without a kit. In: Guin JD (ed) Practical contact dermatitis. A handbook for the practitioner. McGraw-Hill, Philadelphia, PA, pp 63–74

    Google Scholar 

  20. Bruze M (1984) Use of buffer solutions for patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 10:267–269

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Rastogi SC, Menné T (2001) Testing with fine fragrances in eczema patients. Contact Dermatitis 44:304–307

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Sosted H, Basketter DA, Estrada E, Johansen JD, Patlewicz GY (2004) Ranking of hair dye substances according to predicted sensitization potency: quantitative structure-activity relationships. Contact Dermatitis 51:241–254

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Goossens A, Armingaud P, Avenel-Audran M et al (2002) An epidemic of allergic contact dermatitis due to epilating products. Contact Dermatitis 46:67–70

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Bruze M, Frick M, Persson L (2003) Patch testing with thin-layer chromatograms. Contact Dermatitis 48:278–279

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Belsito DV, Fransway AF, Fowler JF Jr, Sherertz EF, Maibach HI, Mark JG Jr, Mathias CG, Rietschel RL, Storrs FJ, Nethercott JR (2002) Allergic contact dermatitis to detergents: a multicenter study to assess prevalence. J Am Acad Dermatol 46(2):200–2006

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Niinimäki A (1987) Scratch-chamber tests in food handler dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 16:11–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Hausen BM (1988) Allergiepflanzen, Pflanzengifte. Handbuch und Atlas der allergieinduzierenden Wild- und Kulturpflanzen. Ecomed, Landsberg Lech

    Google Scholar 

  28. Karlberg AT, Lidén C (1992) Colophony (rosin) in newspapers may contribute to hand eczema. Br J Dermatol 126:161–165

    Google Scholar 

  29. Geier J, Lessmann H, Hillen U, Jappe U, Dickel H, Koch P et al (2004) An attemt to improve diagnostics of contact allergy due to epoxy resin systems. First results of the multicentre study EPOX 2002. Contact Dermatitis 51:263–272

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Tiedemann KH, Zöllner G, Adam M et al (2002) Empfehlungen für die Epikutantestung bei Verdacht auf Kontaktallergie durch Kühlschmierstoffe. 2. Hinweise zur Arbeitsstofftestung. Dermatol Beruf Umwelt 50:180–189

    Google Scholar 

  31. Sherertz EF, Byers SV (1997) Estimating dilutions for patch testing skin care products: a practical method. Am J Contact Derm 8:181–182

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Hautklinik, Klinikum Dortmund gGmbH, Beurhausstr. 40, 44137, Dortmund, Germany

    Peter J. Frosch

  2. Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK), University of Göttingen, von-Siebold-Street 3, 37075, Göttingen, Germany

    Johannes Geier

  3. Department of Medical Informatics, Biometry and Epidemiology, Univ. Erlangen/Nürnberg, Waldstraße 6, 91054, Erlangen, Germany

    Wolfgang Uter

  4. Department of Dermatology, University Hospital, Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    An Goossens

Authors
  1. Peter J. Frosch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Johannes Geier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Wolfgang Uter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. An Goossens
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter J. Frosch .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Dermatology, Amtssygehuset Gentofte, Niels Andersens Vej 65, Hellerup, 2900, Denmark

    Jeanne Duus Johansen

  2. Klinikzentrum Mitte, Hautklinik, Städtische Kliniken Dortmund, Beurhausstr. 40, Dortmund, 44137, Germany

    Peter J. Frosch

  3. Labo. Dermatochimie, Institut le Bel, rue Blaise Pascal 4, Strasbourg CX, 67070, France

    Jean-Pierre Lepoittevin

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Frosch, P.J., Geier, J., Uter, W., Goossens, A. (2011). Patch Testing with the Patients’ Own Products. In: Johansen, J., Frosch, P., Lepoittevin, JP. (eds) Contact Dermatitis. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03827-3_57

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03827-3_57

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-03826-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-03827-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation