Allergic contact dermatitis from rubber chemicals is increasingly recognized.
Objective:
To review the results of patch testing with rubber allergens from January 1, 2000, through December 31, 2007.
Methods:
Patients who underwent patch testing with a specialized series of rubber allergens were identified.
Results:
In total, 773 patients (64.2% female; mean age, 48.6 years) were patch-tested with a rubber series (27 allergens), and 739 (95.6%) were concomitantly patch-tested with a standard allergen series. Commonly affected sites of dermatitis were the hand (49.7%), foot (15.9%), leg (12.0%), and arm (10.9%). The most common occupations were health care worker (16.3%) and homemaker (6.5%); 11.3% were retired. The rate of allergic reaction to at least one rubber allergen was 245 of 773 (31.7%). The allergens that most commonly yielded positive reactions were 4,4-dithiodimorpholine 1% (28/286 [9.8%]), thiuram mix (56/739 [7.6%]), and diphenylguanidine 1% (57/759 [7.5%]).
Conclusion:
Rubber is a frequent cause of allergic contact dermatitis. Patch testing with a rubber series improved the ability to diagnose allergic contact dermatitis caused by rubber.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
MarksJG, BelsitoDV, DeLeoVA, et al.North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch-test results, 1998 to 2000. Am J Contact Dermat, 2003; 14:59-62.
2.
NettisE, AssennatoG, FerranniniA, TursiA. Type I allergy to natural rubber latex and type IV allergy to rubber chemicals in health care workers with glove-related skin symptoms. Clin Exp Allergy, 2002; 32:441-7.
3.
HolnessDL, NethercottJR. Results of patch testing with a special series of rubber allergens. Contact Dermatitis, 1997; 36: 207-11.
4.
DavisMD, ScalfLA, YianniasJA, et al.Changing trends and allergens in the patch test standard series: a Mayo Clinic 5-year retrospective review, January 1, 2001, through December 31, 2005. Arch Dermatol, 2008; 144:67-72.
5.
WetterDA, DavisMD, YianniasJA, et al.Patch test results from the Mayo Clinic Contact Dermatitis Group, 1998-2000. J Am Acad Dermatol, 2005; 53:416-21.
6.
DavisMD, el-AzharyRA, FarmerSA. Results of patch testing to a corticosteroid series: a retrospective review of 1188 patients during 6 years at Mayo Clinic. J Am Acad Dermatol, 2007; 56:921-7. [Epub 2007 Jan 19].
7.
Conde-SalazarL, del-RioE, GuimaraensD, Gonzalez DomingoA. Type IV allergy to rubber additives: a 10-year study of 686 cases. J Am Acad Dermatol, 1993; 29(2 Pt 1):176-80.
8.
MiriS, PourpakZ, ZarinaraA, et al.Prevalence of type I allergy to natural rubber latex and type IV allergy to latex and rubber additives in operating room staff with glove-related symptoms [published erratum appears in Allergy Asthma Proc 2008;29:224]. Allergy Asthma Proc, 2007; 28:557-63.
9.
von HintzensternJ, HeeseA, KochHU, et al.Frequency, spectrum and occupational relevance of type IV allergies to rubber chemicals. Contact Dermatitis, 1991; 24:244-52.
10.
ShackelfordKE, BelsitoDV. The etiology of allergic-appearing foot dermatitis: a 5-year retrospective study. J Am Acad Dermatol, 2002; 47:715-21.
