S'abonner

Eyelid dermatitis in patients referred for patch testing: Retrospective analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data, 1994-2016 - 10/03/21

Doi : 10.1016/j.jaad.2020.07.020 
Erin M. Warshaw, MD, MS a, b, c, Lindsey M. Voller, BA a, c, d, , Howard I. Maibach, MD e, Kathryn A. Zug, MD f, Joel G. DeKoven, MD g, Amber R. Atwater, MD h, Margo J. Reeder, MD i, Denis Sasseville, MD j, James S. Taylor, MD k, Joseph F. Fowler, MD l, Melanie D. Pratt, MD m, Jonathan I. Silverberg, MD n, Anthony F. Fransway, MD o, Matthew J. Zirwas, MD p, Donald V. Belsito, MD q, James G. Marks, MD r, Vincent A. DeLeo, MD s
a Department of Dermatology, Park Nicollet Health Services, Minneapolis, Minnesota 
b Department of Dermatology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota 
c Department of Dermatology, Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Minneapolis, Minnesota 
d University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, Minnesota 
e Department of Dermatology, University of California–San Francisco, San Francisco, California 
f Department of Dermatology, Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire 
g Division of Dermatology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada 
h Department of Dermatology, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina 
i Department of Dermatology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, Wisconsin 
j Division of Dermatology, Royal Victoria Hospital, McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada 
k Department of Dermatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio 
l Division of Dermatology University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 
m Division of Dermatology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada 
n Department of Dermatology, The George Washington University School of Medicine and Health Sciences, Washington, District of Columbia 
o Associates in Dermatology, Fort Myers, Florida 
p Department of Dermatology, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio 
q Department of Dermatology, Columbia University, New York, New York 
r Department of Dermatology, Pennsylvania State University, Hershey, Pennsylvania 
s Department of Dermatology, Keck School of Medicine, Los Angeles, California 

Correspondence to: Lindsey M. Voller, BA, Park Nicollet Contact Dermatitis Clinic, 7550 34th Ave S, Ste 101, Minneapolis, MN 55450.Park Nicollet Contact Dermatitis Clinic7550 34th Ave S, Ste 101MinneapolisMN55450

Abstract

Background

Eyelid dermatitis is a common dermatologic complaint.

Objective

To characterize patients with eyelid dermatitis.

Methods

Retrospective analysis (1994-2016) of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data.

Results

Of 50,795 patients, 2332 (4.6%) had eyelid dermatitis only, whereas 1623 (3.2%) also had dermatitis of the eyelids and head or neck. Compared with patients without eyelid involvement (n = 26,130), groups with eyelid dermatitis only and dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck were significantly more likely to be female, white, and older than 40 years, and to have a history of hay fever, atopic dermatitis, or both (P < .01). Final primary diagnoses included allergic contact dermatitis (eyelid dermatitis only: 43.4%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 53.5%), irritant contact dermatitis (eyelid dermatitis only: 17.0%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 9.8%), and atopic dermatitis (eyelid dermatitis only: 13.1%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 13.8%). Top 5 currently relevant allergens included nickel sulfate (eyelid dermatitis only: 18.6%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 22.5%), fragrance mix I (eyelid dermatitis only: 16.5%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 18.3%), methylisothiazolinone (eyelid dermatitis only: 16.5%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 17.7%), gold sodium thiosulfate (eyelid dermatitis only: 14.7%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 11.4%), and balsam of Peru (eyelid dermatitis only: 11.9%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 12.6%). Both eyelid-involvement groups were significantly more likely to react to gold sodium thiosulfate, carmine, shellac, dimethylaminopropylamine, oleamidopropyl dimethylamine, and thimerosal (P < .05) compared with the no eyelid involvement group.

Limitations

Lack of specific distribution patterns of eyelid dermatitis and no long-term follow-up data.

Conclusion

Patch testing remains a critical tool in evaluating patients with eyelid dermatitis.

Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.

Key words : allergic contact dermatitis, contact allergy, eyelid dermatitis, eyelids, irritant contact dermatitis

Abbreviation used : NACDG


Plan


 Funding sources: None.
 Conflicts of interest: Dr Atwater received a Pfizer Independent Grant for Learning & Change and serves as a consultant for Henkel. Dr. Warshaw has received a research grant from and served as a consultant for Wen by Chaz Dean. Drs Maibach, Zug, DeKoven, Reeder, Sasseville, Taylor, Fowler, Pratt, Silverberg, Fransway, Zirwas, Belsito, Marks, Mathias, and DeLeo and Ms. Voller have no conflicts of interest to declare.
 The contents of this article do not represent the views of the US Department of Veterans Affairs or the US government.
 IRB approval status: Approved by the Minneapolis Veterans Affairs Medical Center's Subcommittee on Human Studies.


© 2020  Publié par Elsevier Masson SAS.
Ajouter à ma bibliothèque Retirer de ma bibliothèque Imprimer
Export

    Export citations

  • Fichier

  • Contenu

Vol 84 - N° 4

P. 953-964 - avril 2021 Retour au numéro
Article précédent Article précédent
  • Eruptions and related clinical course among 296 hospitalized adults with confirmed COVID-19
  • Sergey Rekhtman, Rachel Tannenbaum, Andrew Strunk, Morgan Birabaharan, Shari Wright, Nicole Grbic, Ashna Joseph, Stephanie K. Lin, Aaron C. Zhang, Eric C. Lee, Erika Rivera, Michael Qiu, John Chelico, Amit Garg
| Article suivant Article suivant
  • Contact dermatitis associated with preservatives: Retrospective analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data, 1994 through 2016
  • Amber Reck Atwater, Amy J. Petty, Beiyu Liu, Cynthia L. Green, Jonathan I. Silverberg, Joel G. DeKoven, Donald V. Belsito, Margo J. Reeder, Denis Sasseville, James S. Taylor, Howard I. Maibach, Matthew J. Zirwas, James G. Marks, Kathryn A. Zug, Joseph F. Fowler, Melanie D. Pratt, Vincent A. DeLeo, Erin M. Warshaw

Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.

Déjà abonné à cette revue ?

Mon compte


Plateformes Elsevier Masson

Déclaration CNIL

EM-CONSULTE.COM est déclaré à la CNIL, déclaration n° 1286925.

En application de la loi nº78-17 du 6 janvier 1978 relative à l'informatique, aux fichiers et aux libertés, vous disposez des droits d'opposition (art.26 de la loi), d'accès (art.34 à 38 de la loi), et de rectification (art.36 de la loi) des données vous concernant. Ainsi, vous pouvez exiger que soient rectifiées, complétées, clarifiées, mises à jour ou effacées les informations vous concernant qui sont inexactes, incomplètes, équivoques, périmées ou dont la collecte ou l'utilisation ou la conservation est interdite.
Les informations personnelles concernant les visiteurs de notre site, y compris leur identité, sont confidentielles.
Le responsable du site s'engage sur l'honneur à respecter les conditions légales de confidentialité applicables en France et à ne pas divulguer ces informations à des tiers.


Tout le contenu de ce site: Copyright © 2024 Elsevier, ses concédants de licence et ses contributeurs. Tout les droits sont réservés, y compris ceux relatifs à l'exploration de textes et de données, a la formation en IA et aux technologies similaires. Pour tout contenu en libre accès, les conditions de licence Creative Commons s'appliquent.