Contact sensitivity to preservatives in Turkey

Contact Dermatitis

Volumn 52, Issue 6, 2005, Pages 329-332

  Boyvat, Ayse ^a   Akyol, Aynur ^a   Gürgey, Erbak ^a  

^a ANKARA UNIVERSITY   (Turkey)

Author keywords

Benzalkonium chloride; Contact sensitivity; Formaldehyde; Methyldibromoglutaronitrile; Patch test; Preservatives; Thimerosal; Turkey

Indexed keywords

2 BROMO 2 BROMOMETHYLGLUTARONITRILE; 2 PHENOXYETHANOL; BENZALKONIUM CHLORIDE; BROMINE DERIVATIVE; BROMONITROPROPANEDIOL; CHLOROCRESOL; CHLOROXYLENOL; CONTACT ALLERGEN; DIAZOLIDINYL UREA; GERMALL 115; HYDANTOIN; NITRILE; PRESERVATIVE; PROPANE; PROPYLENE GLYCOL; THIOMERSAL; UNCLASSIFIED DRUG;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ALLERGIC REACTION; ARTICLE; CHILD; CONTACT ALLERGY; CONTACT DERMATITIS; CONTACT SENSITIVITY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; PATCH TEST; PREVALENCE; SKIN SENSITIVITY; TURKEY (REPUBLIC);

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; ALLERGENS; BENZALKONIUM COMPOUNDS; CHILD; DERMATITIS, ALLERGIC CONTACT; FEMALE; FORMALDEHYDE; HUMANS; MALE; MEDICAL RECORDS; MIDDLE AGED; NITRILES; PATCH TESTS; PRESERVATIVES, PHARMACEUTICAL; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; THIMEROSAL; TURKEY;

EID: 20544466997     PISSN: 01051873     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.0105-1873.2005.00607.x     Document Type: Article

References (30)

1. de Groot A C. Labeling cosmetics with their ingredients. Br Med J 1990: 300: 1636-1638.
2. Guin J D. Practical Contact Dermatitis. New York: Mc-Graw Hill, Inc 1995.
3. Wahlberg J E. Patch testing. In: Textbook of Contact Dermatitis, 3rd edn. In: Rycroft R J G, Menne T, Frosch P J, Lepoittevin J P, (eds.), Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 2001, 439-468.
4. Fransway A F. The problem of preservatives in the 1990s. III. Agents with preservative function independent of formaldehyde release. Am J Contact Dermatitis 1991: 2: 145-174.
5. Katsarou A, Lambrinopoulou K, Armenaka M. The positivity of thimerosal in Greece. Contact Dermatitis 1999: 41: 291-292.
6. Freiman A, Al-Layali A, Sasseville D. Patch testing with thimerosal in a Canadian center: an 11-year experience. Am J Contact Dermat 2003: 14: 138-143.
7. Suneja T, Belsito D V. Timerosal in the detection of clinically relevant reactions. J Am Acad Dermatol 2001: 45: 23-27.
8. Schnuch A, Geier J, Uter W, Frosch P J. Patch testing with preservatives, antimicrobials and industrial biocides. Results from a multicentre study. Br J Dermatol 1998: 138: 467-476.
9. Perrenoud D, Bircher A, Hunziker T et al. Frequency of sensitization to 13 common preservatives in Switzerland. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 30: 276-279.
10. Wantke F, Demmer C M, Götz M, Jarisch R. Contact dermatitis from thimerosal: 2 years experience with ethylmercuric chloride in patch testing thimerosal sensitive patients. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 30: 115-117.
11. Möller H. All these positive tests to thimerosal. Contact Dermatitis 1994: 31: 209-213.
12. Bruze M, Conde-Salazar L, Goossens A, Kanerva L, White IR. Thoughts on sensitizers in a standart patch test series. Contact Dermatitis 1999: 41: 241-250.
13. Kanerva L, Jolanki R, Estlander T. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from benzalkonium chloride. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 357-358.
14. Klein G F, Sepp N, Fritsch P. Allergic reactions to benzalkonium chloride? Do the use test. Contact Dermatitis 1991: 25: 269-270.
15. Basketter D A, Marriott M, Gilmour N J, White I R. Strong irritants masquerading as skin allergens: the case of benzalkonium chloride. Contact Dermatitis 2004: 50: 213-217.
16. De Groot A C, van Ginkel C J, Weijland J W. Methyldibromoglutaronitrile (Euxyl K 400): an important 'new' allergen in cosmetics. J Am Acad Dermatol 1996: 35: 743-747.
17. Okkerse A, Geursen-Reitsma A M, Van Joost Th. Contact allergy to methyldibromoglutaronitrile and certain other preservatives. Contact Dermatitis 1996: 34: 151-152.
18. McFadden J P, Ross J S, Jones A B, Rycroft R J G, Smith H R, White I R. Increased rate of patch test reactivity to methyldibromo glutaronitrile. Contact Dermatitis 2000: 42: 54-55.
19. Wilkinson J D, Shaw S, Andersen K E et al. Monitoring levels of preservative sensitivity in Europe. Contact Dermatitis 2002: 46: 207-210.
20. Britton J E, Wilkinson S M, English J S et al. The British standart series of contact dermatitis allergens: validation in clinical practice and value for clinical governance. Br J Dermatol 2003: 148: 259-264.
21. Mowad C M. Methylchloro-isothiazolinone revisited. Am J Contact Dermat 2000: 11: 115-118.
22. Reinhard E, Waeber R, Niederer M, Maurer T, Maly P, Scherer S. Preservation of products with MCI/MI in Switzerland. Contact Dermatitis 2001: 45: 257-264.
23. Bjorkner B, Bruze M, Dahlquist I, Fregert S, Gruvberger B, Persson K. Contact allergy to the preservative Kathon CG. Contact Dermatitis 1986: 14: 85-90.
24. Hannuksela M. Rapid increase in contact allergy to Kathon CG in Finland. Contact Dermatitis 1986: 15: 211-214.
25. Frosch P J, Schulze-Dirks A. Contact allergy to Kathon CG. Hautarzt 1987: 38: 422-425.
26. Tosti A. Prevalance and sources of Kathon CG sensitization in Italy. Contact Dermatitis 1988: 18: 173-174.
27. De Groot A C, Herxheimer A. Isothiazolinone preservative. Cause of continuing epidemic of cosmetic dermatitis. Lancet 1989: 1: 314-316.
28. Marks J G Jr, Belsito D V, DeLeo V A et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch-test results, 1998-2000. Am J Contact Dermat 2003: 14: 59-62.
29. Sertoli A, Francalanci S, Acciai MC, Gola M. Epidemic logical survey of contact dermatitis in Italy (1984-93) by GIRDCA (Gruppe Italiano Ricerca Dermatiti da Contatto e Ambientali). Am J Contact Dermat 1999: 10: 18-30.
30. Akasya-Hillenbrand E, Ozkaya-Bayazit E. Patch test results in 542 patients with suspected contact dermatitis in Turkey. Contact Dermatitis 2002: 46: 17-23.