Contact Dermatitis to Polysporin® Masquerading as a Delayed-Type Hypersensitivity Response to Dye Pigment

1997 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 238-240
Author(s):  
Betty Bellman ◽  
Fredric S. Brandt

Background: A 15-year-old Hispanic adolescent with multiple amateur India ink tattoos developed a recurrent, eczematous pruritic eruption several weeks after each treatment with the Q-switched ruby laser. Objective: To determine if the patient was having an allergic reaction to tattoo dye pigment or an allergic contact dermatitis. Methods: Open- and closed-patch testing was performed to Polysporin® ointment, which revealed a 2+ vesicular reaction. Conclusion: Delayed-type hypersensitivity responses to contact allergens can very closely mimic the less common allergic reactions to dye pigment from tattoos. Open- and closed-patch testing to topical medications should be performed on any patient suspected of having an allergic reaction to tattoo dye pigment.

2017 ◽  
Vol 16 (9) ◽  
pp. 1471-1479 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Lembo ◽  
G. Caiazzo ◽  
N. Balato ◽  
G. Monfrecola ◽  
V. Patra ◽  
...  

PLE is considered a delayed-type hypersensitivity response (DTHR) against a putative ultraviolet (UV)-induced de novo antigen. The level of IL-36, in particular IL-36γ, is increased in patients’ skin and blood.


2016 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-17
Author(s):  
S. Bhattarai ◽  
A. Rijal ◽  
S. Agrawal

Introduction: Allergic contact dermatitis in Nepal is not an uncommon disorder. Patch testing is a well established method of diagnosing allergic contact dermatitis. Patients with contact dermatitis are well known to have impaired quality of life which often leads to frequent dermatological consultations.Objective: Lack of data from Nepal has prompted us to undertake this study with the aims to know the frequency of allergic contact dermatitis and the commonest contact allergens among the patients with Hand eczema attending the out-patient department of dermatology, B.P. Koirala Institute of Health Sciences and Kathmandu Medical College Teaching Hospital.Material and Methods: A total of 256 patients were included in the study. Out of them 195 with hand eczema agreed to participate and undergo patch testing. The antigens used included the Indian standard series of patch test allergens approved by Contact and Occupational Dermatoses Forum of India.Results: Hundred and ten cases (56.4%) were patch test positive (PTP) at 48 as well as 96 hours to at least one allergen. PTP was seen more commonly in females. The most common allergen in females was nickel sulphate followed by cobalt chloride, gentamicin and mercapto mix while males were positive to potassium dichromate, followed by epoxy resin, fragrance mix and nickel sulphate.Conclusion: Patch testing has proved a useful tool for the detection of allergic contact dermatitis and for identification of contact allergens. When positive reactions correlate with environmental exposure the test usually assists the physician in establishing the cause of dermatitis, hence treating the patients and improving their quality of life.Nepal Journal of Dermatology, Venereology & Leprology, Vol.14(1) 2016, pp.14-17


Author(s):  
Vikram K. Mahajan ◽  
Pushpinder Singh Chauhan ◽  
Karaninder Singh Mehta ◽  
Anuj Sharma ◽  
Bhumika Chowdhary ◽  
...  

Background: The reliability of patch testing with expired Indian standard patch test kits has been not evaluated before. Methods: Thirty adults (men:women 25:5) with allergic contact dermatitis were divided into three groups of ten patients each for patch testing by Finn chamber® method using Indian standard patch test kits having expiry in 2016, 2015 and 2014. The results were compared with those from a new kit with 2018 expiry. Results: Ten patients in group-1, eight patients in group-2 and seven patients in group-3 developed positive reactions of identical intensities and mostly from identical allergens from all four kits. The major contact allergens eliciting positive reactions of identical intensities were parthenium in nine, five and three patients, colophony in four, one and zero patients, fragrance mix in three, three and one patients, thiuram mix in three, one and one patients, and paraphenylene diamine in two, one and three patients from group-1,-2, and -3, respectively. Limitations: Small number of patients in each group remains the major limitation of the study. Whether or not these results can be extrapolated with patch test results from other similar patch test kits available across countries also needs confirmation. Conclusion: The patch test allergens can be used beyond labeled expiry dates but needs confirmation by a few large studies and using other available patch test kits. This is important as the relevance of patch test results for individual allergen in this scenario may remain debatable requiring careful interpretation.


2019 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 11-16
Author(s):  
Yanna Rotua Sihombing ◽  
Debi Dinha Sitepu

Immunomodulator is a compound that can increaase the imuno system. One of the plants that have immunomodulator’s activity is Waru Leaf (Hibiscus tiliaceus). the purpose of this research was to test the effect of immunomodulator by extract of Waru Leaf ethanol on rat male. The activity of immunomodulator was determined by using digital pletysmometer by measuring the differences between the last leg swelling’s volume and the first leg swelling’s volume. The treatment group were divided into 5 groups. Each group consistof 5 rats CMC-Na 0,5% (negative control), Stimuno®  32,5 mg/kgBW (positive control), dose of EEDW 50, 100 and 200 mg/kgBW, and bacteria E.coli as antigen. The results slowed that distribution of EEDW dose 200 mg/kgBW can give the effect of immunostimulant by swelling enthancement compared by CMC-Na 0,5 %. EEDW 200 mg/kgBW that have activity comparable with Stimuno®  32,5 mg/kgBW. Thus, it is concluded that of Waru Leaf extract has immunomodulator effects on delayed-type hypersensitivity response of rat male.


Dermatitis ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Bruin Pollard ◽  
Reid W. Collis ◽  
Dylan Stahl ◽  
Carrie C. Coughlin ◽  
David M. Sheinbein

2020 ◽  
Vol 83 (4) ◽  
pp. 333-335
Author(s):  
Josefin Ulriksdotter ◽  
Martin Mowitz ◽  
Cecilia Svedman ◽  
Magnus Bruze

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document