Patch testing

Contact Dermatitis (Fifth Edition)

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 439-464

  Lindberg, Magnus ^a   Matura, Mihaly ^b  

^a ÖREBRO UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b KAROLINSKA INSTITUTE   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959856747     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/978-3-642-03827-3_24     Document Type: Chapter

References (153)

1. Malten KE, Nater JP, vanKetel WG (1976) Patch testing guidelines. Dekker and van de Vegt, Nijmegen.
2. Fregert S (1981) Manual of contact dermatitis, 2nd edn. Munksgaard, Copenhagen.
3. Bandmann HJ, Dohn W (1967) Die Epicutantestung. Bergmann, Munich.
4. Rajagopolan R, Anderson R (1997) Impact of patch testing on dermatology-specific quality of life in patients with allergic contact dermatitis. Am J Contact Dermat 8:215-221.
5. Thomson KF, Wilkinson SM, Sommer S, Pollock B (2002) Eczema: quality of life by body site and the effect of patch testing. Br J Dermatol 146:627-630.
6. Woo PN, Hay IC, Ormerod AS (2003) An audit of the value of patch testing and its effect on quality of life. Contact Dermatitis 48:244-247.
7. Van der Valk PGM, Devos SA, Coenraads P-J (2003) Evidence-based diagnosis in patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 48:121-125.
8. Mowad CM (2006) Patch testing: pitfalls and performance. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 6:340-344.
9. Jadassohn J (1896) Zur Kenntnis der medikamentösen Dermatosen, Verhandlungen der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft. Fünfter Congress, Raz, 1895. Braunmuller, Vienna, p 106.
10. Foussereau J (1984) History of epicutaneous testing: The blotting-paper and other methods. Contact Dermatitis 11: 219-223.
11. Fischer TI, Hansen J, Kreilgård B, Maibach HI (1989) The science of patch test standardization. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 9:417-443.
12. Belsito DV, Storrs FJ, Taylor JS, Marks JG Jr, Adams RM, Rietschel RL, Jordan WP, Emmett EA (1992) Reproducibility of patch tests: A United States multi-centre study. Am J Contact Dermat 3:193-200.
13. Breit R, Agathos M (1992) Qualitätskontrolle der Epikutantestung - Reproduzierbarkeit im Rechts-Links-Vergleich. Hautarzt 43:417-421.
14. Bousema MT, Geursen AM, vanJoost T (1991) High reproducibility of patch tests. J Am Acad Dermatol 24:322-323.
15. Lachapelle JM, Antoine JL (1989) Problems raised by the simultaneous reproducibility of positive allergic patch test reactions in man. J Am Acad Dermatol 21:850-854.
16. Machácková J, Seda O (1991) Reproducibility of patch tests. J Am Acad Dermatol 25:732-733.
17. Lindelöf B (1990) A left versus right side comparative study of Finn Chamber™ patch tests in 220 consecutive patients. Contact Dermatitis 22:288-289.
18. Stransky L, Krasteva M (1992) A left versus right side comparative study of Finn Chamber patch tests in consecutive patients with contact sensitization. Dermatosen 40:158-159.
19. Brasch J, Henseler T, Aberer W, Bäuerle G, Frosch PJ, Fuchs T, Fünfstück V, Kaiser G, Lischka GG, Pilz B, Sauer C, Schaller J, Scheuer B, Szliska C (1994) Reproducibility of patch tests. A multicenter study of synchronous left-versus right-sided patch tests by the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group. J Am Acad Dermatol 31:584-591.
20. Gollhausen R, Przybilla B, Ring J (1989) Reproducibility of patch test results: comparison of True test and Finn Chamber test. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goossens A, Lachapelle JM, Rycroft RJ, Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin, pp 524-529.
21. Lachapelle J-M, Bruynzeel DP, Ducombs G, Hannuksela M, Ring J, White IR, Wilkinson J, Fischer T, Billberg K (1988) European multicenter study of the True test™. Contact Dermatitis 19:91-97.
22. Ruhnek-Forsbeck M, Fischer T, Meding B, Pettersson L, Stenberg B, Strand A, Sundberg K, Svensson L, Wahlberg JE, Widström L, Wrangsjö K, Billberg K (1988) Comparative multi-center study with True test™ and Finn Chamber® patch test methods in eight Swedish hospitals. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 68:123-128.
23. Stenberg B, Billberg K, Fischer T, Nordin L, Pettersson L, Ruhnek-Forsbeck M, Sundberg K, Swanbeck G, Svensson L, Wahlberg JE, Widström L, Wrangsjö K (1989) Swedish multicenter study with True test, panel 2. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goossens A, Lachapelle JM, Rycroft RJ, Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin, pp 518-523.
24. Wilkinson JD, Bruynzeel DP, Ducombs G, Frosch PJ, Gunnarsson Y, Hannuksela M, Ring J, Shaw S, White IR (1990) European multicenter study of TRUE test, panel 2. Contact Dermatitis 22:218-225.
25. Ale SI, Maibach HI (2004) Reproducibility of patch test results: A concurrent right-versus-left study using TRUE test TM. Contact Dermatitis 50:304-312.
26. Bourke JF, Batta K, Prais L, Abdullah A, Foulds IS (1999) The reproducibility of patch tests. Br J Dermatol 140:102-105.
27. Schiessl C, Wolber C, Strohal R (2004) Reproducibility of patch tests: comparison of identical test allergens from different commercial sources. Contact Dermatitis 50:27-30.
28. Fullerton A, Rud Andersen J, Hoelgaard A, Menné T (1986) Permeation of nickel salts through human skin in vitro. Contact Dermatitis 15:173-177.
29. Brasch J, Szliska C, Grabbe J (1997) More positive patch test reactions with larger test chambers? Contact Dermatitis 37:118-120.
30. Gefeller O, Phahlberg A, Geier J, Brasch J, Uter W (1999) The association between size of test chamber and patch test reaction: A statistical reanalysis. Contact Dermatitis 40:14-18.
31. Ryberg K, Gruvberger B, Zimerson E, Isaksson M, Persson L, Sörensen Ö, Goossens A, Bruze M (2008) Chemical investigations of disperse dyes in patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 58:199-209.
32. Fregert S (1985) Publication of allergens. Contact Dermatitis 12:123-124.
33. Dooms-Goossens A, Degreef H (1983) Contact allergy to petrolatums I. Sensitizing capacity of different brands of yellow and white petrolatums. Contact Dermatitis 9:175-185.
34. Bruze M (1984) Use of buffer solutions for patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 10:267-269.
35. Fischer T, Maibach H (1989) Easier patch testing with TRUE test. J Am Acad Dermatol 20:447-453.
36. Magnusson B, Blohm S-G, Fregert S, Hjorth N, Høvding G, Pirilä V, Skog E (1966) Routine patch testing II. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 46:153-158.
37. Benezra C, Andanson J, Chabeau C, Ducombs G, Foussereau J, Lachapelle JM, Lacroix M, Martin P (1978) Concentrations of patch test allergens: Are we comparing the same things? Contact Dermatitis 4:103-105.
38. Bruze M, Isaksson M, Gruvberger B, Frick-Engfeldt M (2007) Recommendation of appropriate amounts of petrolatum preparation to be applied at patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 56:281-285.
39. Bruze M (1986) Sensitizing capacity of 2-methylol phenol, 4-methylol phenol and 2, 4, 6-trimethylol phenol in the Guinea Pig. Contact Dermatitis 14:32-38.
40. Wall LM, Calnan CD (1980) Occupational nickel dermatitis in the electroforming industry. Contact Dermatitis 6: 414-420.
41. Wahlberg JE (1996) Nickel: The search for alternative, optimal and non-irritant patch test preparations. Assessments based on laser Doppler flowmetry. Skin Res Technol 2: 136-141.
42. Widman TJ, Oostman H, Storrs FJ (2008) Allergic contact dermatitis from medical adhesive bandages in patients who report having a reaction to medical bandages. Dermatitis 19:32-37.
43. Daecke C, Schaller S, Schaller J, Goos M (1993) Contact urticaria from acrylic acid in Fixomull tape. Contact Dermatitis 29:216-217.
44. Tokumura F, Ohyama K, Fujisawa H, Matsuda T, Kitazaki Y (1997) Conformability and irritancy of adhesive tapes on the skin. Contact Dermatitis 37:173-178.
45. Fischer T, Dahlén Å, Bjkarnason B (1999) Influence of patch-test application tape on reactions to sodium lauryl sulphate. Contact Dermatitis 40:32-37.
46. Brasch J, Kreilgård B, Henseler T, Aberer W, Fuchs T, Pfluger R, Hoeck U, Gefeller O (2000) Positive nickel patch tests do not intensify positive reactions to adjacent patch tests with dichromate. Contact Dermatitis 43:144-149.
47. Duarte I, Lazzarini R, Buense R (2002) Interference of the position of substances in an epicutaneous patch test battery with the occurrence of false-positive results. Am J Contact Dermat 13:125-132.
48. Fischer T, Maibach HI (1986) Patch testing in allergic contact dermatitis: An update. Semin Dermatol 5:214-224.
49. Fisher AA (1986) Contact dermatitis, 3rd edn. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia.
50. Wahlberg JE, Maibach HI (1980) Nonanoic acid irritation - A positive control at routine patch testing? Contact Dermatitis 6:128-130.
51. Wahlberg JE, Wrangsjö K, Hietasalo A (1985) Skin irritancy from nonanoic acid. Contact Dermatitis 13:266-269.
52. Geier J, Uter W, Pirker C, Frosch PJ (2003) Patch testing with the irritant sodium lauryl sulphate (SLS) is useful in interpreting weak reactions to contact allergens as allergic or irritant. Contact Dermatitis 48:99-107.
53. Wahlberg JE, Lindberg M (2003) Nonanoic acid - An experimental irritant. Contact Dermatitis 49:117-123.
54. DeGroot AC (2008) Patch testing. Test concentrations and vehicles for 4350 chemicals, 3rd edn. Wapserveen, The Netherlands.
55. Kanerva L, Elsner P, Wahlberg JE, Maibach HI (2000) Handbook of occupational dermatology. Springer, Berlin.
56. Cronin E (1980) Contact dermatitis. Churchill Livingstone, London.
57. Adams RM (1990) Occupational skin disease, 2nd edn. Saunders, Philadelphia.
58. Foussereau J, Benezra C, Maibach HI (1982) Occupational contact dermatitis. Clinical and chemical aspects. Munksgaard, Copenhagen.
59. Hjorth N (1961) Eczematous allergy to balsams. Allied perfumes and flavouring agents. Munksgaard, Copenhagen.
60. Takano S, Yamanaka M, Okamoto K, Saito F (1983) Allergens of lanolin: parts I and II. J Soc Cosmet Chem 34:99-125.
61. Fregert S, Dahlquist I, Trulsson L (1984) An attempt to isolate and identify allergens in lanolin. Contacts Dermat 10:16-19.
62. Karlberg A-T (1988) Contact allergy to colophony. Chemical identifications of allergens, sensitization experiments and clinical experiences. Thesis, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden.
63. Alé SI, Maibach HI (2002) Scientific basis of patch testing. Dermatol Beruf Umwelt 50:43-50; 91-96;131-133.
64. Hansson C, Agrup G (1993) Stability of the mercaptobenzothiazole compounds. Contact Dermatitis 28:29-34.
65. Bergendorff O, Hansson C (2001) Stability of thiuram disulfides in patch test preparations and formation of asymmetric disulfides. Contact Dermatitis 45:151-157.
66. Lachapelle J-M, Maibach HI (2003) Patch testing, prick testing. A practical guide. Springer, Berlin.
67. Björkner B, Bruze M, Dahlquist I, Fregert S, Gruvberger B, Persson K (1986) Contact allergy to the preservative Kathon® CG. Contact Dermatitis 14:85-90.
68. de Groot AC (1988) Adverse reactions to cosmetics. Thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, The Netherlands.
69. Andersen KE, Burrows D, Cronin Dooms-Goossens A, Rycroft RJG, White IR (1988) Recommended changes to baseline series. Contact Dermatitis 19:389-390.
70. Wahlberg JE (1998) Identification of new allergens and nonirritant patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 39: 155-156.
71. Bryld LE, Agner T, Rastogi SC, Menné T (1997) Idopropynyl butylcarbamate: A new contact allergen. Contact Dermatitis 36:156-158.
72. Schnuch A, Geijer J, Brasch J, Uter W (2002) The preservative iodoproponyl butylcarbamate: frequence of allergic reactions and diagnostic considerations. Contact Dermatitis 46:153-156.
73. Bruze M, Condé-Salazar L, Goossens A, Kanerva L, White I (1999) Thoughts on sensitizers in a standard patch test series. Contact Dermatitis 41:241-250.
74. Rietschel R, Adams RM, Maibach HI, Storrs FJ, Rosenthal LE (1988) The case for patch test readings beyond day 2. J Am Acad Dermatol 18:42-45.
75. MacFarlane AW, Curley RK, Graham RM, Lewis-Jones MS, King CM (1989) Delayed patch test reactions at days 7 and 9. Contact Dermatitis 20:127-132.
76. Wahlberg JE, Wahlberg ENG (1987) Quantification of skin blood flow at patch test sites. Contact Dermatitis 17: 229-233.
77. Geier J, Gefeller O, Wiechmann K, Fuchs T (1999) Patch test reactions at D4, D5 and D6. Contact Dermatitis 40: 119-126.
78. Dickel H, Taylor JS, Evey P, Merk HF (2000) Delayed readings of a standard screening patch test tray: frequency of lost, found, and persistent reactions. Am J Contact Dermat 11:213-217.
79. Saino M, Rivara P, Guarrera M (1995) Reading patch tests on day 7. Contact Dermatitis 32:312.
80. Jonker MJ, Bruynzel DP (2000) The outcome of an additional patch-test reading on days 6 or 7. Contact Dermatitis 42:330-335.
81. Bygum A, Andersen KE (1998) Persistent reactions after patch testing with TRUE Test™ panels 1 and 2. Contact Dermatitis 38:218-220.
82. Uter WJC, Geier J, Schnuch A (1996) Good clinical practice in patch testing: readings beyond day 2 are necessary: A confirmatory analysis. Am J Contact Dermat 7:231-237.
83. Shehade SA, Beck MH, Hiller VF (1991) Epidemiological survey of baseline series patch test results and observations on day 2 and day 4 readings. Contact Dermatitis 24: 119-122.
84. Todd DJ, Handley J, Metwali M, Allen GE, Burrows D (1996) Day 4 is better than day 3 for a single patch test reading. Contact Dermatitis 34:402-404.
85. Uter W, Frosch PJ, Becker D, Schnuch A, Pfahlberg A, Gefeller O (2009) Are we biased when reading a doubtful patch test reaction to a 'clear-cut' allergen such as the thiuram mix? Contact Dermatitis 60:234-235.
86. Uter W, Becker D, Schnauch A, Gefeller O, Frosch PJ (2007) The validity of rating patch test reactions based on digital images. Contact Dermatitis 57:337-342.
87. Lachapelle JM, Tennstedt D, Fyad A, Masmoudi ML, Nouaigui H (1988) Ring-shaped positive allergic patch test reactions to allergens in liquid vehicles. Contact Dermatitis 18:234-236.
88. Bruze M, Isaksson M, Edman B, Björkner B, Fregert S, Möller H (1995) A study on expert reading of patch test reactions: inter-individual accordance. Contact Dermatitis 32:331-337.
89. Lachapelle J-M (1997) A proposed relevance scoring system for positive allergic patch test reactions: practical implications and limitations. Contact Dermatitis 36:39-43.
90. Rycroft RJG (1986) False reactions to nonstandard patch tests. Semin Dermatol 5:225-230.
91. Björnberg A (1968) Skin reactions to primary irritants in patients with hand eczema. An investigation with matched controls. Thesis, Sahlgrenska Sjukhuset, Gothenburg, Sweden.
92. Andersen KE, Lidén C, Hansen J, Vølund Å (1993) Doseresponse testing with nickel sulphate using the TRUE test in nickel-sensitive individuals. Multiple nickel sulphate patch-test reactions do not cause an 'angry back'. Br J Dermatol 129:50-56.
93. Bruynzeel DP, Maibach HI (1990) Excited skin syndrom and the hyporeactive state: current status. In: Menné T, Maibach HI (eds) Exogenous dermatoses: environmental dermatitis. CRC, Boca Raton, FL, pp 141-150.
94. Cockayne SE, Gawkrodger DJ (2000) Angry back syndrome is often due to marginal irritants: A study of 17 cases seen over 4 years. Contact Dermatitis 43:280-282.
95. Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R, Alanko K (2000) Falsenegative patch test reactions due to a lower concentration of patch test substance than declared. Contact Dermatitis 42: 289-291.
96. Koehler AM, Maibach HI (2000) Skin hyporeactivity in relation to patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 42:1-4.
97. Kelett JK, King CM, Beck MH (1986) Compound allergy to medicaments. Contact Dermatitis 14:45-48.
98. Aldridge RD, Main RA (1984) Contact dermatitis due to a combined miconazole nitrate/hydrocortisone cream. Contact Dermatitis 10:58-60.
99. Smeenk G, Kerckhoffs HPM, Schreurs PHM (1987) Contact allergy to a reaction product in Hirudoid® cream: An example of compound allergy. Br J Dermatol 116: 223-231.
100. Bashir SJ, Maibach HI (1997) Compound allergy. An overview. Contact Dermatitis 36:179-183.
101. Bashir SJ, Kanervaq L, Jolanki R, Maibach HI (2000) Occupational and non-occupational compound allergy. In: Kanerva L, Elsner P, Wahlberg JE, Maibach HI (eds) Handbook of occupational dermatology. Springer, Berlin, pp 351-355.
102. McLelland J, Shuster S, Matthews JNS (1991) Irritants increase the response to an allergen in allergic contact dermatitis. Arch Dermatol 127:1016-1019.
103. McLelland J, Shuster S (1990) Contact dermatitis with negative patch tests. Br J Dermatol 122:623-630.
104. Sukanto H, Nater JP, Bleumink E (1981) Influence of topically applied corticosteroids on patch test reactions. Contact Dermatitis 7:180-185.
105. O'Quinn SE, Isbell KH (1969) Influence of oral prednisone on eczematous patch test reactions. Arch Dermatol 99: 380-389.
106. Feuerman E, Levy A (1972) A study of the effect of prednisone and an antihistamine on patch test reactions. Br J Dermatol 86:68-71.
107. Condie MW, Adams RM (1973) Influence of oral prednisone on patch-test reactions to Rhus antigen. Arch Dermatol 107:540-543.
108. Anveden I, Lindberg M, Andersen KE, Bruze M, Isaksson M, Lidén C, Sommerlund M, Wahlberg J, Wilkinson J, Willis C (2004) Oral prednisone suppresses allergic but not irritant patch test reactions in individuals hypersensitive to nickel. Contact Dermatitis 50:298-303.
109. Olupona T, Scheinman P (2008) Successful patch testing despite concomitant low-dose prednisone use. Dermatitis 19:117-118.
110. Lembo G, Presti ML, Balato N, Ayala F, Santoianni P (1985) Influence of cinnarizine on patch test reactions. Contact Dermatitis 13:341-343.
111. Motolese A, Ferdani G, Manzini BM, Seidenari S (1995) Echographic evaluation of patch test inhibition by oral antihistamine. Contact Dermatitis 32:251.
112. Elston D, Licata A, Rudner E, Trotter K (2000) Pitfalls in patch testing. Am J Contact Dermat 11:184-188.
113. Aldridge RD, Sewell HF, King G, Thomson AW (1986) Topical cyclosporin A in nickel contact hypersensitivity: results of a preliminary clinical and immunohistochemical investigation. Clin Exp Immunol 66:582-589.
114. Nakagawa S, Oka D, Jinno Y, Takei Y, Bang D, Ueki H (1988) Topical application of cyclosporine on guinea pig allergic contact dermatitis. Arch Dermatol 124:907-910.
115. Biren CA, Barr RJ, Ganderup GS, Lemus LL, McCullough JL (1989) Topical cyclosporine: effects on allergic contact dermatitis in guinea pigs. Contact Dermatitis 20:10-16.
116. Sjövall P (1988) Ultraviolet radiation and allergic contact dermatitis. An experimental and clinical study. Thesis, University of Lund, Sweden.
117. Lindelöf B, Lidén S, Lagerholm B (1985) The effect of grenz rays on the expression of allergic contact dermatitis in man. Scand J Immunol 21:463-469.
118. Ek L, Lindelöf B, Lidén S (1989) The duration of Grenz ray-induced suppression of aller gic contact dermatitis and its correlation with the density of Langerhans cells in human epidermis. Clin Exp Dermatol 14:206-209.
119. Cruz PD (1996) Effects of UV light on the immune system: Answer to five basic questions. Am J Contact Dermat 7:47-52.
120. Tie C, Golomb C, Taylor JR, Strelein JW (1995) Suppressive and enhancing effects of ultraviolet B radiation on expression of contact hypersensitivity in man. J Invest Dermatol 104:18-22.
121. Ingber A, Sasson A, David M (1998) The seasonal influence on patch test reactions is significant in Israel. Contact Dermatitis 39:318-319.
122. Uter W, Geier J, Land M, Phahlberg A, Gefeller O, Schnauch A (2001) Another look at seasonal variation in patch test results. Contact Dermatitis 44:146-152.
123. Uter W, Hegewald J, Phahlberg A, Pirker C, Frosch PJ, Gefeller O (2003) The association between ambient air conditions (temperature and absolute humidity), irritant sodium lauryl sulphate patch test reactions and patch test reactivity to standard allergens. Contact Dermatitis 49:97-102.
124. Gawkrodger DJ, Paul L (2008) Late patch test reactions: delayed immune response appears to be more common than active sensitization. Contact Dermatitis 59:185-187.
125. Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R (1988) Sensitization to patch test acrylates. Contact Dermatitis 18:10-15.
126. Lidén C, Boman A, Hagelthorn G (1982) Flare-up reactions from a chemical used in the film industry. Contact Dermatitis 8:136-137.
127. Inerot A, Möller H (2000) Symptoms and signs reported during patch testing. Am J Contact Dermat 11:49-52.
128. Kunkeler L, Bikkers SCE, Bezemer PD, Bruynzeel DP (2000) (Un)usual effects of patch testing? Br J Dermatol 143:582-586.
129. Kamphof WG, Kunkeler L, Bikkers SCE, Bezemer PD, Bruynzeel DP (2003) Patch-test-induced subjective complaints. Dermatology 207:28-32.
130. Dooms-Goossens A (1995) Patch testing without a kit. In: Guyin JD (ed) Practical contact dermatitis. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 63-74.
131. Hannuksela M, Salo H (1986) The repeated open application test (ROAT). Contact Dermatitis 14:221-227.
132. Hannuksela M (1991) Sensitivity of various skin sites in the repeated open application test. Am J Contact Dermat 2:102-104.
133. Hannuksela A, Niinimäki A, Hannuksela M (1993) Size of the test area does not affect the result of the repeated open application test. Contact Dermatitis 28:299-300.
134. Johansen JD, Andersen KE, Rastogi SC, Menné T (1996) Threshold responses in cinnamic-aldehyde-sensitive subjects: results and methodological aspects. Contact Dermatitis 34:165-171.
135. Johansen JD, Andersen KE, Menné T (1996) Quantitiative aspects of isoeugenol contact allergy assessed by use and patch tests. Contact Dermatitis 34:414-418.
136. Wahlberg JE, Färm G, Lidén C (1997) Quantification and specificity of the repeated open application test (ROAT). Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 77:420-424.
137. Johansen JD, Bruze M, Andersen KE, Frosch PJ, Dreier B, White IR, Rastogi S, Lepoittevin JP, Menné T (1997) The repeated open application test: suggestions for a scale of evaluation. Contact Dermatitis 39:95-96.
138. Flyvholm M-A, Hall BM, Agner T, Tiedemann E, Greenhill P, Vanderveken W, Freeberg FE, Menné T (1997) Threshold for occluded formaldehyde patch test in formaldehydesensitive patients. Contact Dermatitis 36:26-33.
139. Tupker RA, Schuur J, Coenraads PJ (1997) Irritancy of antiseptics tested by repeated open exposures on the human skin, evaluated by non-invasive methods. Contact Dermatitis 37:213-217.
140. Färm G (1998) Repeated open application tests (ROAT) in patients allergic to colophony - evaluated visually and with bioengineering techniques. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 78:130-135.
141. Nakada T, Hostynek JJ, Maibach HI (2000) Use tests: ROAT (repeated open application test)/PUT (provocative use test): An overview. Contact Dermatitis 43:1-3.
142. Berardesca E, Maibach HI (1988) Bioengineering and the patch test. Contact Dermatitis 18:3-9.
143. Bjarnason B, Flosadottir E, Fischer T (1999) Objective non-invasive assessment of patch tests with the laser Doppler perfusion scanning technique. Contact Dermatitis 40:251-260.
144. Staberg B, Klemp P, Serup J (1984) Patch test responses evaluated by cutaneous blood flow measurements. Arch Dermatol 120:741-743.
145. Fullerton A, Stucker M, Wilhelm K-P, Wårdell K, Anderson C, Fischer T, Nilsson GE, Serup J (2002) Guidelines for visualization of cutaneous blood flow by laser Doppler perfusion imaging. Contact Dermatitis 46: 129-140.
146. Wahlberg JE (1989) Assessment of erythema: A comparison between the naked eye and laser Doppler flowmetry. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goossens A, Lachapelle JM, Rycroft RJ, Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin, pp 549-553.
147. Wahlberg JE (1971) Vehicle role of petrolatum. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 51:129-134.
148. Vanneste D, Martin P, Lachapelle JM (1980) Comparative study of the density of particles in suspension for patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 6:197-203.
149. Fischer T, Maibach HI (1984) Patch test allergens in petrolatum: A reappraisal. Contact Dermatitis 11:224-228.
150. Mellström GA, Sommar K, Wahlberg JE (1992) Patch test preparations of metallic mercury under the microscope. Contact Dermatitis 26:64-65.
151. Karlberg A-T, Lidén C (1988) Comparison of colophony patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 18:158-165.
152. Magnusson B, Hersle K (1966) Patch test methods. III. Influence of adhesive tape on test response. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 46:275-278.
153. Bruze M, Frick M, Persson L (2003) Patch testing with thin-layer chromatograms. Contact Dermatitis 48:278-279.