Patch testing

Contact Dermatitis

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 365-390

  Wahlberg, Jan E ^a   Lindberg, Magnus ^b  

^a KAROLINSKA UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL   (Sweden)

^b Department of Occupational Dermatology ^*  (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84895320799     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1007/3-540-31301-X_22     Document Type: Chapter

References (155)

1. Malten KE, Nater JP, van Ketel 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) Evidencebased diagnosis in patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 48:121-125
8. Jadassohn J (1896) Zur Kenntnis der medikamentösen Dermatosen, Verhandlungen der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft. Fünfter Congress, Raz, 1895. Braunmuller, Vienna, p 106
9. Foussereau J (1984) History of epicutaneous testing: the blotting-paper and other methods. Contact Dermatitis 11:219-223
10. Fischer TI, Hansen J, Kreilgård B, Maibach HI (1989) The science of patch test standardization. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 9:417-443
11. 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
12. Breit R, Agathos M (1992) Qualitätskontrolle der Epikutantestung - Reproduzierbarkeit im Rechts-Links-Vergleich. Hautarzt 43:417-421
13. Bousema MT, Geursen AM, van Joost T (1991) High reproducibility of patch tests. J Am Acad Dermatol 24:322-323
14. 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
15. Machácková J, Seda O (1991) Reproducibility of patch tests. J Am Acad Dermatol 25:732-733
16. Lindelöf B (1990) A left versus right side comparative study of Finn Chamber" patch tests in 220 consecutive patients. Contact Dermat 22:288-289
17. 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
18. 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 leftversus right-sided patch tests by the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group. J Am Acad Dermatol 31:584-591
19. Fullerton A, Rud Andersen J, Hoelgaard A, Menné T (1986) Permeation of nickel salts through human skin in vitro. Contact Dermatitis 15:173-177
20. Brasch J, Szliska C, Grabbe J (1997) More positive patch test reactions with larger test chambers? Contact Dermatitis 37:118-120
21. Chemotechnique Diagnostics (2003) Patch test products. Catalogue. Malmö, Sweden
22. 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
23. Trolab Hermal (2003) Patch test allergens. Trolab, Hermal, Reinbek, Germany
24. Fregert S (1985) Publication of allergens. Contact Dermatitis 12:123-124
25. Dooms-Goossens A, Degreff H (1983) Contact allergy to petrolatums I. Sensitizing capacity of different brands of yellow and white petrolatums. Contact Dermatitis 9:175-185
26. Bruze M (1984) Use of buffer solutions for patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 10:267-269
27. Fischer T, Maibach H (1989) Easier patch testing with TRUE test. J Am Acad Dermatol 20:447-453
28. 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
29. 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
30. 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
31. Wall LM, Calnan CD (1980) Occupational nickel dermatitis in the electroforming industry. Contact Dermatitis 6:414-420
32. Wahlberg JE (1996) Nickel: the search for alternative, optimal and non-irritant patch test preparations. Assessments based on laser Doppler flowmetry. Skin Res Technol 2:33.
33. 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
34. Fischer T, Dahlén Å, Bjkarnason B (1999) Influence of patch-test application tape on reactions to sodium lauryl sulphate. Contact Dermatitis 40:32-37
35. 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
36. 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
37. Fischer T, Maibach HI (1986) Patch testing in allergic contact dermatitis: an update. Semin Dermatol 5:214-224
38. Fisher AA (1986) Contact Dermatitis, 3rd edn. Lea and Febiger, Philadelphia
39. Wahlberg JE, Maibach HI (1980) Nonanoic acid irritation - a positive control at routine patch testing? Contact Dermatitis 6:128-130
40. Wahlberg JE, Wrangsjö K, Hietasalo A (1985) Skin irritancy from nonanoic acid. Contact Dermatitis 13:266-269
41. 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
42. Wahlberg JE, Lindberg M (2003) Nonanoic acid - an experimental irritant. Contact Dermatitis 49:117-123
43. 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 Heidelberg New York, pp 524-529
44. 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
45. ® patch test methods in eight Swedish hospitals. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 68:123-128
46. 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 Heidelberg New York, pp 518-523
47. 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
48. de Groot AC (1994) Patch testing. Test concentrations and vehicles for 3700 chemicals, 2nd edn. Elsevier, Amsterdam
49. De Groot AC (1986) Patch testing. Test concentrations and vehicles for 2800 allergens. Elsevier, Amsterdam
50. Cronin E (1986) Some practical supplementary trays for special occupations. Semin Dermatol 5:243-248
51. Kanerva L, Elsner P, Wahlberg JE, Maibach HI (2000) Handbook of occupational dermatology. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
52. Cronin E (1980) Contact dermatitis. Churchill Livingstone, London
53. Adams RM (1990) Occupational skin disease, 2nd edn. Saunders, Philadelphia
54. Foussereau J, Benezra C, Maibach HI (1982) Occupational contact dermatitis. Clinical and chemical aspects. Munksgaard, Copenhagen
55. Hjorth N (1961) Eczematous allergy to balsams. Allied perfumes and flavouring agents. Munksgaard, Copenhagen
56. Takano S, Yamanaka M, Okamoto K, Saito F (1983) Allergens of lanolin: parts I and II. J Soc Cosmet Chem 34:99-125
57. Fregert S, Dahlquist I, Trulsson L (1984) An attempt to isolate and identify allergens in lanolin. Contacts Dermatitis 10:16-19
58. Karlberg A-T (1988) Contact allergy to colophony. Chemical identifications of allergens, sensitization experiments and clinical experiences. Thesis, Karolinska Institute, Stockholm, Sweden
59. Alé SI, Maibach HI (2002) Scientific basis of patch testing. Dermatol Beruf Umwelt 50:43-50, 91-96, 131-133
60. Hansson C, Agrup G (1993) Stability of the mercaptobenzothiazole compounds. Contact Dermatitis 28:29-34
61. Bergendorff O, Hansson C (2001) Stability of thiuram disulfides in patch test preparations and formation of asymmetric disulfides. Contact Dermatitis 45:151-157
62. Lachapelle J-M, Maibach HI (2003) Patch testing, prick testing. A practical guide. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York
63. ® CG. Contact Dermatitis 14:85-90
64. de Groot AC (1988) Adverse reactions to cosmetics. Thesis, Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, the Netherlands
65. Andersen KE, Burrows D, Cronin, Dooms-Goossens A, Rycroft RJG, White IR (1988) Recommended changes to standard series. Contact Dermatitis 19:389-390
66. Wahlberg JE (1998) Identification of new allergens and non-irritant patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 39:155-156
67. Bryld LE, Agner T, Rastogi SC, Menné T (1997) Idopropynyl butylcarbamate: a new contact allergen. Contact Dermatitis 36:156-158
68. 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
69. 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
70. Bruynzeel DP, Andersen KE, Camarasa JG, Lachapelle J-M, Menné T, White IR (1995) The European standard series. Contact Dermatitis 33:145-148
71. Isaksson M, Brandao FM, Bruze M, Goossens A (2000) Recommendation to include budesonide and tixocortol pivalate in the European standard series. Contact Dermatitis 43:41-42
72. Lachapelle J-M, Ale SI, Freeman S, Frosch PJ, Goh CL, Hannuksela M, Hayakawa R, Maibach HI, Wahlberg JE (1997) Proposal for a revised international standard series of patch tests. Contact Dermatitis 36:121-123
73. Kalimo K, Lammintausta K (1984) 24 and 48 h allergen exposure in patch testing. Comparative study with 11 common contact allergens and NiCl2. Contact Dermatitis 10:25-29
74. Brasch J, Geier J, Henseler T (1995) Evaluation of patch test results by use of the reaction index. An analysis data recorded by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK). Contact Dermatitis 33:375-380
75. Manuskiatti W, Maibach HI (1996) 1-versus 2-and 3-day diagnostic patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 35:197-200
76. Bruze M (1988) Patch testing with nickel sulphate under occlusion for five hours. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 68:361-364
77. Kosann MK, Brancaccio RR, Shupack JL, Franks AG Jr, Cohen DE (1998) Six-hour versus 48-hour patch testing with varying concentrations of potassium dichromate. Am J Contact Dermat 9:92-95
78. McFadden JP, Wakelin SH, Holloway DB, Basketter DA (1998) The effect of patch duration on the elicitation of para-phenylenediamine contact allergy. Contact Dermatitis 39:79-81
79. 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
80. 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
81. Wahlberg JE, Wahlberg ENG (1987) Quantification of skin blood flow at patch test sites. Contact Dermatitis 17:229-233
82. Geier J, Gefeller O, Wiechmann K, Fuchs T (1999) Patch test reactions at D4, D5 and D6. Contact Dermatitis 40:119-126
83. 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 Dermatitis 11:213-217
84. Saino M, Rivara P, Guarrera M (1995) Reading patch tests on day 7. Contact Dermatitis 32:312
85. Jonker MJ, Bruynzel DP (2000) The outcome of an additional patch-test reading on days 6 or 7. Contact Dermatitis 42:330-335
86. Bygum A, Andersen KE (1998) Persistent reactions after patch testing with TRUE Test" panels 1 and 2. Contact Dermatitis 38:218-220
87. 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
88. Shehade SA, Beck MH, Hiller VF (1991) Epidemiological survey of standard series patch test results and observations on day 2 and day 4 readings. Contact Dermatitis 24:119-122
89. 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
90. 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
91. Scheynius A, Fischer T (1986) Phenotypic difference between allergic and irritant patch test reactions in man. Contact Dermatitis 14:297-302
92. 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
93. Lachapelle J-M (1997) A proposed relevance scoring system for positive allergic patch test reactions: practical implications and limitations. Contact Dermatitis 36:39-43
94. Rycroft RJG (1986) False reactions to nonstandard patch tests. Semin Dermatol 5:225-230
95. Björnberg A (1968) Skin reactions to primary irritants in patients with hand eczema. An investigation with matched controls. Thesis, Sahlgrenska Sjukhuset, Gothenburg, Sweden
96. 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
97. 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, Fla., pp 141-150
98. 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
99. 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
100. Koehler AM, Maibach HI (2000) Skin hyporeactivity in relation to patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 42:1-4
101. Kelett JK, King CM, Beck MH (1986) Compound allergy to medicaments. Contact Dermatitis 14:45-48
102. Aldridge RD, Main RA (1984) Contact dermatitis due to a combined miconazole nitrate/hydrocortisone cream. Contact Dermatitis 10:58-60
103. ® cream: an example of compound allergy. Br J Dermatol 116:223-231
104. Bashir SJ, Maibach HI (1997) Compound allergy. An overview. Contact Dermatitis 36:179-183
105. 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 Heidelberg New York, pp 351-355
106. McLelland J, Shuster S, Matthews JNS (1991) "Irritants" increase the response to an allergen in allergic contact dermatitis. Arch Dermatol 127:1016-1019
107. McLelland J, Shuster S (1990) Contact dermatitis with negative patch tests. Br J Dermatol 122:623-630
108. Sukanto H, Nater JP, Bleumink E (1981) Influence of topically applied corticosteroids on patch test reactions. Contact Dermatitis 7:180-185
109. O'Quinn SE, Isbell KH (1969) Influence of oral prednisone on eczematous patch test reactions. Arch Dermatol 99:380-389
110. 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
111. Condie MW, Adams RM (1973) Influence of oral prednisone on patch-test reactions to Rhus antigen. Arch Dermatol 107:540-543
112. 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
113. Lembo G, Presti ML, Balato N, Ayala F, Santoianni P (1985) Influence of cinnarizine on patch test reactions. Contact Dermatitis 13:341-343
114. Motolese A, Ferdani G, Manzini BM, Seidenari S (1995) Echographic evaluation of patch test inhibition by oral antihistamine. Contact Dermatitis 32:251
115. Elston D, Licata A, Rudner E, Trotter K (2000) Pitfalls in patch testing. Am J Contact Dermat 11:184-188
116. 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
117. 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
118. 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
119. Sjövall P (1988) Ultraviolet radiation and allergic contact dermatitis. An experimental and clinical study. Thesis, University of Lund, Sweden
120. 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
121. Ek L, Lindelöf B, Lidén S (1989) The duration of Grenz ray-induced suppression of allergic contact dermatitis and its correlation with the density of Langerhans cells in human epidermis. Clin Exp Dermatol 14:206-209
122. Cruz PD (1996) Effects of UV light on the immune system: answer to five basic questions. Am J Contact Dermatitis 7:47-52
123. 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
124. Ingber A, Sasson A, David M (1998) The seasonal influence on patch test reactions is significant in Israel. Contact Dermatitis 39:318-319
125. 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
126. 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
127. Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R (1988) Sensitization to patch test acrylates. Contact Dermatitis 18:10-15
128. Lidén C, Boman A, Hagelthorn G (1982) Flare-up reactions from a chemical used in the film industry. Contact Dermatitis 8:136-137
129. Inerot A, Möller H (2000) Symptoms and signs reported during patch testing. Am J Contact Dermatitis 11:49-52
130. Kunkeler L, Bikkers SCE, Bezemer PD, Bruynzeel DP (2000) (Un) usual effects of patch testing? Br J Dermatol 143:582-586
131. Kamphof WG, Kunkeler L, Bikkers SCE, Bezemer PD, Bruynzeel DP (2003) Patch-test-induced subjective complaints. Dermatology 207:28-32
132. Dooms-Goossens A (1995) Patch testing without a kit. In: Guyin JD (ed) Practical contact dermatitis. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 63-74
133. Hannuksela M, Salo H (1986) The repeated open application test (ROAT). Contact Dermatitis 14:221-227
134. Hannuksela M (1991) Sensitivity of various skin sites in the repeated open application test. Am J Contact Dermat 2:102-104
135. 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
136. 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
137. Johansen JD, Andersen KE, Menné T (1996) Quantitiative aspects of isoeugenol contact allergy assessed by use and patch tests. Contact Dermatitis 34:414-418
138. Wahlberg JE, Färm G, Lidén C (1997) Quantification and specificity of the repeated open application test (ROAT). Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 77:420-424
139. 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
140. 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
141. 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
142. 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
143. 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
144. Berardesca E, Maibach HI (1988) Bioengineering and the patch test. Contact Dermatitis 18:3-9
145. 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
146. Staberg B, Klemp P, Serup J (1984) Patch test responses evaluated by cutaneous blood flow measurements. Arch Dermatol 120:741-743
147. 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
148. 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 Heidelberg New York, pp 549-553
149. Wahlberg JE (1971) Vehicle role of petrolatum. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 51:129-134
150. Vanneste D, Martin P, Lachapelle JM (1980) Comparative study of the density of particles in suspension for patch testing. Contact Dermatitis 6:197-203
151. Fischer T, Maibach HI (1984) Patch test allergens in petrolatum: a reappraisal. Contact Dermatitis 11:224-228
152. Mellström GA, Sommar K, Wahlberg JE (1992) Patch test preparations of metallic mercury under the microscope. Contact Dermatitis 26:64-65
153. Karlberg A-T, Lidén C (1988) Comparison of colophony patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 18:158-165
154. Magnusson B, Hersle K (1966) Patch test methods. III. Influence of adhesive tape on test response. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 46:275-278
155. Bruze M, Frick M, Persson L (2003) Patch testing with thin-layer chromatograms. Contact Dermatitis 48:278-279