Filter by keywords:



Filtering documents. Please wait...

1/5. Airborne allergic contact dermatitis from 3-iodo-2-propynyl-butylcarbamate at a paint factory.

    3-Iodo-2-propynyl-butylcarbamate (IPBC) is a fungicide used in both industrial products and cosmetics. We report the first case of allergic contact dermatitis from airborne exposure to this preservative. A 34-year-old female production worker at a paint factory developed dermatitis on air-exposed skin areas. Patch testing showed a reaction to the preservative IPBC 0.01% in petrolatum. The compound was used as a preservative in wood treatment products manufactured at her work place. Based on animal studies, IPBC is considered safe as a cosmetic preservative. However, widespread use of the chemical might lead to increasing levels of contact allergy, and therefore, close monitoring of IPBC is recommended.
- - - - - - - - - -
ranking = 1
keywords = animal
(Clic here for more details about this article)

2/5. Acute mercury intoxication with lichenoid drug eruption followed by mercury contact allergy and development of antinuclear antibodies.

    A 31-year-old black man was examined for evaluation of a suspected occupational disease. Three years earlier he had been suffering from acute mercury intoxication during work in a mercury recycling factory. Skin symptoms then had been a lichenoid drug eruption, patchy alopecia and stomatitis, which had all disappeared rapidly after systemic glucocorticosteroid treatment. The examination revealed positive patch test reactions to metallic mercury and inorganic mercury compounds, an elevated titre of serum antinuclear antibodies and normal IgE levels. The induction of antinuclear antibodies by mercury has been shown in animal experiments. It can be hypothesized that this patient, who may have had an increased individual susceptibility, became allergic to mercury by the mercury intoxication.
- - - - - - - - - -
ranking = 1
keywords = animal
(Clic here for more details about this article)

3/5. A method for identifying causative chemicals of allergic contact dermatitis using a combination of chemical analysis and patch testing in patients and animal groups: application to a case of rubber boot dermatitis.

    A 63-year-old woman developed allergic contact dermatitis from rubber boots. Initial investigation, by patch testing in the patient and chemical analysis of the causative rubber boots, revealed that mercaptobenzothiazole (MBT) and dibenzothiazyl disulfide (MBTS) were the causative chemicals. Subsequent investigations were performed by patch testing in animal groups. An extract of the causative rubber boots, MBT and MBTS were used for sensitization of guinea pigs by the guinea pig maximization test (GPMT). 3 animal groups, A (with the boot extract), B (with MBT) and C (with MBTS) were successfully prepared. The boot extract was fractionated by column chromatography and thin-layer chromatography (TLC). Each fraction was subjected to patch testing in the animal groups. Positive reactions in all groups would show that the active fractions contained MBT-type compounds, whereas a positive reaction in group A but negative ones in group B and C would show that the active fractions did not contain any MBT-type compounds. Each fraction was then analyzed by gas chromatography (GC), GC-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), direct inlet-MS (DI-MS) and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). By this investigation, we found not only known allergens (MBT, MBTS), but also unknown allergens: S-substituted MBT-type compounds and styrenated phenol (SP). Thus, SP was shown to be a candidate as a human sensitizer even though the patient did not react to it.
- - - - - - - - - -
ranking = 7
keywords = animal
(Clic here for more details about this article)

4/5. Selective allergy to sheep's and goat's milk proteins.

    BACKGROUND: Cow's milk proteins are amongst the most common causes of food allergy in infants, and caseins are probably the main allergens. The existence of a high degree of cross-reactivity between milk caseins from different animals has been reported. We describe a 2-year-old boy who experienced allergic reactions after eating and touching sheep's cheese, but who tolerated cow's milk and cow's milk dairy products. He had never ingested milk or milk derivatives from sheep or goat. methods: Skin prick tests were carried out using whey fractions of cow's milk, whole milk and casein from goat, sheep and cow. We also performed skin prick tests with enzymes used in cheese production. Prick-by-prick tests with cheese made from cow, sheep and goat and their corresponding whole milk were also performed. Total serum IgE and specific IgE to cow's milk proteins, whole cow's milk and sheep's milk were determined. Specific IgE against casein and whole milk from the three different species were determined by ELISA. Inhibition of IgE binding to bovine casein was tested for casein and whole milk from all three species. The proteins of three types of casein and whole milk from cow, sheep and goat were separated by SDS-PAGE and were incubated with the patient's serum. RESULTS: skin tests were positive to sheep's milk and goat and sheep casein and were negative to all cow's milk proteins and whole cow's and goat's milk. Prick-by-prick tests were positive to goat's and sheep's cheese and were negative to cow's cheese. In ELISA-inhibition, sheep's milk and goat and sheep casein were able to inhibit > 50 % of specific IgE binding to sheep casein. The results of immunoblotting showed that the patient's circulating IgEs recognized only one band in the lanes corresponding to sheep and goat casein. CONCLUSIONS: We report a patient with allergy to sheep's and goat's milk proteins but not to cow's milk proteins. sheep casein was probably the main allergen causing sensitization in this patient. The results suggest that sheep casein shows a high degree of cross-reactivity with goat casein but not with cow casein. Our patient presented allergic symptoms caused by sheep and goat milk and cheese proteins. However, he was able to tolerate cow's milk and cow's milk dairy products without any ill effects.
- - - - - - - - - -
ranking = 1
keywords = animal
(Clic here for more details about this article)

5/5. Allergic contact dermatitis to ethoxyquin in a farmer handling chicken feeds.

    Farm workers handling animal feeds are exposed to a variety of chemicals, some of which may cause allergic contact dermatitis. A case of allergy to ethoxyquin (a preservative added to chicken feed to inhibit vitamin degradation) in a chicken farmer is presented. Although the offending allergen was identified in this patient, it proved difficult to find ethoxyquin-free chicken feed products and the patient's dermatitis persisted. When facing the clinical problem of dermatitis in animal workers, the possibility of allergic contact dermatitis to components in animal feeds must be considered.
- - - - - - - - - -
ranking = 3
keywords = animal
(Clic here for more details about this article)


Leave a message about 'Dermatitis, Allergic Contact'


We do not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content in this site. Click here for the full disclaimer.