Allergic contact dermatitis caused by (meth)acrylates in long-lasting nail polish - are we facing a new epidemic in the beauty industry?

2017 ◽  
Vol 77 (6) ◽  
pp. 360-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maria-Elena Gatica-Ortega ◽  
Maria-Antonia Pastor-Nieto ◽  
Pedro Mercader-García ◽  
Juan-Francisco Silvestre-Salvador
2018 ◽  
Vol 109 (6) ◽  
pp. 508-514 ◽  
Author(s):  
M.E. Gatica-Ortega ◽  
M.A. Pastor-Nieto ◽  
J.F. Silvestre-Salvador

2017 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 340-344 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel DeKoven ◽  
Joel DeKoven ◽  
D. Linn Holness

Background: Recently, many cases of acrylate-associated allergic contact dermatitis have appeared among nail salon workers. Common acrylate-containing products in nail salons include traditional nail polish, ultraviolet-cured shellac nail polish, ultraviolet-cured gel nails, and press-on acrylic nails. Methods: Nail salon technicians seen in the occupational medicine clinic in 2015 and 2016 were identified, and their patch test results and clinical features were summarized. Patch testing was done with the Chemotechnique (Meth)Acrylate nail series, and either the North American Standard series or the North American Contact Dermatitis Group screening series. Results: Six patients were identified, all women, ages 38 to 58. Common presentations included erythematous dermatitis of the dorsa of the hands, palms, and forearms and fissures on the fingertips. Less common sites of eruptions included the periorbital region, cheeks, posterior ears, neck, sacral area, lateral thighs, and dorsa of the feet. All patients reacted to hydroxyethyl methacrylate, and 5 patients reacted to ethyl acrylate. Each patient also reacted to (meth)acrylates that are not found on either standard series, including ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate, 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate, and 2-hydroxyethyl acrylate. Conclusions: The authors report 6 cases of allergic contact dermatitis to acrylates in nail technicians seen over the past year, representing a new trend in their clinic. These cases are reflective of a growing trend of nail technicians with allergic contact dermatitis associated with occupational (meth)acrylate exposure. Efforts to improve prevention are needed.


2018 ◽  
Vol 79 (3) ◽  
pp. 184-185 ◽  
Author(s):  
Senhong Lee ◽  
Danit Maor ◽  
Amanda Palmer ◽  
Rosemary L. Nixon

2018 ◽  
Vol 78 (4) ◽  
pp. 261-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
María-Elena Gatica-Ortega ◽  
María-Antonia Pastor-Nieto ◽  
Rocío Gil-Redondo ◽  
Elena-Remedios Martínez-Lorenzo ◽  
Cristina Schöendorff-Ortega

Author(s):  
Ashok Kumar B. Nagure ◽  
Guruprasad Kalyanrao Y.

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> <span lang="EN-IN">Agents which cause contact dermatitis are simple chemical compounds and by themselves these agents will not cause sensitization and are called haptens. These require another molecule usually a protein called the carrier molecule derived from the epidermis to cause allergic sensitization. The confirmation of contact dermatitis is done by the patch testing. There is no substitute for the patch test in the management of allergic contact dermatitis.</span></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> <span lang="EN-IN">After selecting the patient suspected to have allergic contact dermatitis the findings were recorded in the proforma which also includes the systemic examination of CVS, CNS, GIT and respiratory system to study systemic correlation if any. Investigation were done which included Hb%, TLC, DLC, urine routine and microscopic examination, patch testing and other special investigations if required. The patient was subjected to patch testing after the acute stage has subsided and the patient was on no therapy with topical or systemic steroids prior to patch testing</span>.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> <span lang="EN-IN">The incidence of allergic contact dermatitis due to cosmetics was found in 7 (5.6%) cases. In that hair dye (PPD) inducing dermatitis was found in 4 (57.4%) and due to hair oil 1 (14.2%), kumkum 1 (14.2%) and Sunsilk shampoo 1 (14.2%). The incidence of PPD sensitivity in this series of 125 cases was 4 (3.2%). </span></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> <span lang="EN-IN">PPD is a well-known potent sensitizer, it is a chief constituent of the commonly used hair dyes and also some other cosmetics like nail polish.</span></p>


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document