The dermal toxicity of cement

2002 ◽  
Vol 18 (7) ◽  
pp. 321-331 ◽  
Author(s):  
Chris Winder ◽  
Martin Carmody

Cement and concrete are products used widely in the construction sector, with a traditional perception that any hazards that they have are limited to dermatitis in a small number of workers. In some cases, employers and builders do not think that concrete is a chemical. However, contact dermatitis is one of the most frequently reported health problems among construction workers. A review of the available literature suggests that cement has constituents that produce both irritant contact dermatitis and corrosive effects (from alkaline ingredients such as lime) and sensitization, leading to allergic contact dermatitis (from ingredients such as chromium). These findings indicate that cement and concrete should be treated as hazardous materials, and that workers handling such products should reduce exposure wherever possible. Initiatives to reduce the chromium content of cement have been shown to be successful in reducing the incidence of allergic dermatitis, although the irritant form remains.

2021 ◽  
Vol 30 (5) ◽  
pp. 394-398
Author(s):  
Paola Monari ◽  
Marta Fusano ◽  
Ruggero Moro ◽  
Ilaria Baiguini ◽  
PierGiacomo Calzavara-Pinton ◽  
...  

Background: Dermatitis of surrounding skin may complicate hard-to-heal leg ulcers, delaying wound healing. The coexistence of hard-to-heal leg ulcers and irritant or allergic contact dermatitis may create difficulties for both diagnostic and therapeutic management. Objective: The aim of our study was to evaluate the incidence of dermatitis occurring in the surrounding skin in a population affected by hard-to-heal leg ulcers during treatment, and to differentiate between allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) and irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) with the use of a patch test. Furthermore, we investigated which medications were most probably related to these conditions. Method: We conducted an observational study from 21 February to 21 July 2017, enlisting all patients affected by hard-to-heal leg ulcers who attended the Wound Care Service of the Dermatologic Department of ASST, Spedali Civili, Brescia, Italy. Results: We enrolled 95 patients; 81 patients did not develop dermatitis, while 14 patients developed dermatitis of the surrounding skin. These patients underwent a patch test which gave a positive result in seven patients, permitting the diagnosis of ACD. Conclusion: Our study confirmed the incidence of dermatitis of the surrounding skin reported in the literature but reassessed the incidence of ACD as opposed to ICD.


1995 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 226-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
L. Condé-Salazar ◽  
D. Guimaraens ◽  
C. Villegas ◽  
A. Rumero ◽  
M. A. Gonzalez

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>


2012 ◽  
Vol 87 (4) ◽  
pp. 567-571 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rosana Lazzarini ◽  
Ida Alzira Gomes Duarte ◽  
Juliana Mayumi Sumita ◽  
Rogério Minnicelli

BACKGROUND: Contact dermatitis is one of the common work-related dermatoses. Among bricklayers, cement can cause both allergic contact dermatitis and primary contact irritative dermatitis. The personal protective equipment (rubber gloves) may favor the development of allergic contact dermatitis. OBJECTIVES: 1) to evaluate the frequency of allergic contact dermatitis among construction workers between January 2005 and December 2009; 2) to determine the major sensitizing agents in the study group; and 3) to compare the data obtained from the construction workers to that of a group of patients who were not construction workers. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of patch tests. Patients were separated into two groups: 1) bricklayers and 2) non-bricklayers. RESULTS: Of the 525 patch tests analyzed, 466 (90%) were from non-bricklayers and 53 (10%) from bricklayers. The hands were affected in 38 (61%) of them. 13 patients (24%) had irritative contact dermatitis and 40 (76%) had allergic contact dermatitis. The group of construction workers had a high frequency of sensitization to cement, and 29 (54.7%) had sensitization to rubber vulcanizing agents. 23 patients (43.4%) had sensitization to both cement and rubber. CONCLUSIONS: Among the bricklayers the presence of allergic contact dermatitis to rubber and cement in the same patient is common and demonstrates the importance of the patch test.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document