scholarly journals Noneczematous Contact Dermatitis

ISRN Allergy ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Domenico Bonamonte ◽  
Caterina Foti ◽  
Michelangelo Vestita ◽  
Gianni Angelini

Irritant or allergic contact dermatitis usually presents as an eczematous process, clinically characterized by erythematoedematovesicous lesions with intense itching in the acute phase. Such manifestations become erythematous-scaly as the condition progresses to the subacute phase and papular-hyperkeratotic in the chronic phase. Not infrequently, however, contact dermatitis presents with noneczematous features. The reasons underlying this clinical polymorphism lie in the different noxae and contact modalities, as well as in the individual susceptibility and the various targeted cutaneous structures. The most represented forms of non-eczematous contact dermatitis include the erythema multiforme-like, the purpuric, the lichenoid, and the pigmented kinds. These clinical entities must obviously be discerned from the corresponding “pure” dermatitis, which are not associated with contact with exogenous agents.

Dermatitis ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 26 (3) ◽  
pp. 133-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amy L. Gosnell ◽  
Brian Schmotzer ◽  
Susan T. Nedorost

Author(s):  
Meena Chauhan ◽  
Renu Rattan ◽  
Geeta Ram Tegta ◽  
Chander Shekhar ◽  
Bhupender Dutt ◽  
...  

<p class="abstract"><strong>Background:</strong> <span lang="EN-IN">Phytodermatitis refers to inflammation of the skin caused by a plant. The clinical patterns of dermatitis due to plants can present as allergic phytodermatitis, photophytodermatitis, irritant contact dermatitis or in the form of mechanical injury. The commonest plant causing allergic contact dermatitis in India is <em>Parthenium hysterophorus</em>, followed by other plants. Phytodermatitis due to <em>Toxicodendron succedaneum</em> is not uncommon in sub Himalayan range of North India and it has variable clinical presentation.</span>The aim of the study was <span lang="EN-IN">to study and evaluate the patients of allergic contact dermatitis due to <em>T. succedaneum</em>.</span></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Methods:</strong> <span lang="EN-IN">All patients having allergic contact dermatitis due to <em>T. succedaneum</em> from August 2015 to July 2016 were enrolled for the study</span>.<strong></strong></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Results:</strong> <span lang="EN-IN">Our study included 13 (76.4%) males and 4 (23.5%) females with a mean age of 32 years. 76.4% patients developed lesions within 24-48 hours after contact with plant, 17.6% after 48 hours and 5.8% developed in less than 24 hours. Most of the (88.2%) patients presented with disseminated lesions and 11.7% had localised lesions involving only hands and forearms. Urticaria (41.1% ) was the commonest finding followed by papuloplaque lesions (in 29.4% patients), further followed by erythema multiforme like lesions (in 11.7% patients) and maculopapular, vesiculobullous lesions and angiodema (in 5.8% of each patients). Patch test was positive in 16 (94.1%) cases. Majority of patients required systemic steroids to settle the dermatitis. </span></p><p class="abstract"><strong>Conclusions:</strong> <span lang="EN-IN">Allergic contact dermatitis due to <em>T. succedaneum</em> is very common in this region. Although it presents with widespread clinical presentations but adequate literature was not found on this plant. This plant further requires more study to know the dermatitis caused by it.</span></p>


Dermatitis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison H. Kohn ◽  
Sarah P. Pourali ◽  
Brandon L. Adler ◽  
April W. Armstrong

Author(s):  
Joo Youn Shin ◽  
Yun Chul Hong ◽  
Jong Han Leem ◽  
Shin Goo Park ◽  
Jee Na Lee ◽  
...  

2004 ◽  
Vol 50 (2) ◽  
pp. 53-59 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. S. Modjtahedi ◽  
S. P. Modjtahedi ◽  
H. I. Maibach

2011 ◽  
Vol 31 (1) ◽  
pp. 61-63 ◽  
Author(s):  
Olga Ferreira ◽  
Maria João Cruz ◽  
Alberto Mota ◽  
Ana Paula Cunha ◽  
Filomena Azevedo

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document