Differential diagnosis of contact dermatitis: A practical-approach review by the EADV Task Force on contact dermatitis.

The diagnosis of eczema ('dermatitis') is mostly clinical and depends on the clinical history and exploratory objective findings (primary lesions, patterns). Contact dermatitis remains as an important condition in the group of eczematous disorders, with important socioeconomic and occupational relevance. Although irritant and allergic contact dermatitis have a different pathogenesis, both are characterized by a rather typical morphology, are triggered by external factors and tend to occur primarily in the area of contact with the exogenous agent. In addition, allergic and irritant dermatitis may also co-exist. The importance of diagnosing contact dermatitis, especially when allergic in nature, is both due to the possibility of avoiding the trigger, and due to its role in aggravating other skin conditions. Nevertheless, the heterogeneity of clinical presentations in daily practice may pose an important challenge for the suspicion and correct diagnosis of contact dermatitis. Furthermore, other conditions, with different pathogenesis and treatment, may clinically simulate contact dermatitis. The Task Force aims to conduct a review of the unifying clinical features of contact dermatitis and characterize its main clinical phenotypes, and its simulators, in order to contribute to an early suspicion or recognition of contact dermatitis and enable a correct differential diagnosis

European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA): Characteristics of patients patch tested and diagnosed with irritant contact dermatitis

Background Irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) is caused by the acute locally toxic effect of a strong irritant, or the cumulative exposure to various weaker physical and/or chemical irritants. Objectives To describe the characteristics of patients with ICD in the population patch tested in the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA; ) database. Methods Data collected by the ESSCA in consecutively patch-tested patients from January 2009 to December 2018 were analyzed. Results Of the 68 072 patients, 8702 were diagnosed with ICD (without concomitant allergic contact dermatitis [ACD]). Hand and face were the most reported anatomical sites, and 45.7% of the ICD was occupational ICD (OICD). The highest proportions of OICD were found in metal turners, bakers, pastry cooks, and confectionery makers. Among patients diagnosed with ICD, 45% were found sensitized with no relevance for the current disease. Conclusions The hands were mainly involved in OICD also in the subgroup of patients with contact dermatitis, in whom relevant contact sensitization had been ruled out, emphasizing the need for limiting irritant exposures. However, in difficult-to-treat contact dermatitis, unrecognized contact allergy, or unrecognized clinical relevance of identified allergies owing to incomplete or wrong product ingredient information must always be considered

Psoriasis and Atopic Dermatitis

Contains fulltext : 169799.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)Psoriasis and atopic dermatitis are common, chronic inflammatory skin diseases. We discuss several aspects of these disorders, including: risk factors+ADs- incidence and prevalence+ADs- the complex disease burden+ADs- and the comorbidities that increase the clinical significance of each disorder. We also focus on treatment management strategies and outline why individualized, patient-centered treatment regimens should be part of the care plans for patients with either psoriasis or atopic dermatitis. Finally, we conclude that, while our theoretical knowledge of the optimum care plans for these patients is increasingly sophisticated, this understanding is, unfortunately, not always reflected in daily clinical practice

The role and choice criteria of antihistamines in allergy management – expert opinion

Allergic diseases are the most common chronic conditions lasting throughout the patient’s life. They not only cause significant deterioration in the quality of life of patients but also lead to significant absenteeism and reduced productivity, resulting in very high costs for society. Effective and safe treatment of allergic diseases is therefore one of the main challenges for public health and should be carried out by all the specialists in family medicine, internists and paediatricians in collaboration with allergists, otorhinolaryngologists and dermatologists. Antihistamines are most commonly used in the treatment of allergies. Several dozen drugs are available on the pharmaceutical market, and their generic forms are advertised widely as very effective drugs for the treatment of allergic diseases. What is the truth? What are the data from clinical trials and observational studies? Are all drugs equally effective and safe for the patient? According to a panel of experts representing various fields of medicine, inappropriate treatment of allergies can be very risky for patients, and seemingly equally acting medications may differ greatly. Therefore, a panel of experts gathered the latest data from the entire scientific literature and analysed the latest standards and recommendations prepared by scientific societies. This paper provides a summary of these studies and highlights the importance for the patient of the proper choice of drug to treat his allergies

European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA) : Contact allergies in relation to body sites in patients with allergic contact dermatitis

Analyses of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA) database have focused primarily on the prevalence of contact allergies to the European baseline series, both overall and in subgroups of patients. However, affected body sites have hitherto not been addressed. To determine the prevalence of contact allergies for distinct body sites in patients with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Analysis of data collected by the ESSCA () in consecutively patch tested patients, from 2009 to 2014, in eight European countries was performed. Cases were selected on the basis of the presence of minimally one positive patch test reaction to the baseline series, and a final diagnosis of ACD attributed to only one body site. Six thousand two hundred and fifty-five cases were analysed. The head and hand were the most common single sites that ACD was attributed to. Differences between countries were seen for several body sites. Nickel, fragrance mix I, cobalt and methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone were the most frequent allergens reported for various body sites. Distinct allergen patterns per body site were observed. However, contact allergies were probably not always relevant for the dermatitis that patients presented with. The possibility of linking positive patch test reactions to relevance, along with affected body sites, should be a useful addition to patch test documentation systems

Building Bridges in Dermatology: Proceedings of the 9th Skin Academy Symposium

<p><b>Article full text</b></p> <p><br> </p> <p>The full text of this article can be found here<b>. </b><a href="https://link.springer.com/journal/13555/7/1/suppl/page/1">https://link.springer.com/journal/13555/7/1/suppl/page/1</a></p><p></p> <p><br></p> <p><b>Provide enhanced content for this article</b></p> <p><br></p> <p>If you are an author of this publication and would like to provide additional enhanced content for your article then please contact <a href="http://www.medengine.com/Redeem/”mailto:[email protected]”"><b>[email protected]</b></a>.</p> <p><br></p> <p>The journal offers a range of additional features designed to increase visibility and readership. All features will be thoroughly peer reviewed to ensure the content is of the highest scientific standard and all features are marked as ‘peer reviewed’ to ensure readers are aware that the content has been reviewed to the same level as the articles they are being presented alongside. Moreover, all sponsorship and disclosure information is included to provide complete transparency and adherence to good publication practices. This ensures that however the content is reached the reader has a full understanding of its origin. No fees are charged for hosting additional open access content.</p> <p><br></p> <p>Other enhanced features include, but are not limited to:</p> <p><br></p> <p>• Slide decks</p> <p>• Videos and animations</p> <p>• Audio abstracts</p> <p>• Audio slides</p

European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA): Characteristics of patients patch tested and diagnosed with irritant contact dermatitis

Background: Irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) is caused by the acute locally toxic effect of a strong irritant, or the cumulative exposure to various weaker physical and/or chemical irritants. Objectives: To describe the characteristics of patients with ICD in the population patch tested in the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA; www.essca-dc.org) database. Methods: Data collected by the ESSCA in consecutively patch tested patients from January 2009 to December 2018 were analyzed. Results: Of the 68 072 patients, 8702 were diagnosed with ICD (without concomitant allergic contact dermatitis [ACD]). Hand and face were the most reported anatomical sites, and 45.7% of the ICD was occupational ICD (OICD). The highest proportions of OICD were found in metal turners, bakers, pastry cooks, and confectionery makers. Among patients diagnosed with ICD, 45% were found sensitized with no relevance for the current disease. Conclusions: The hands were mainly involved in OICD also in the subgroup of patients with contact dermatitis, in whom relevant contact sensitization had been ruled out, emphasizing the need for limiting irritant exposures. However, in difficult-to-treat contact dermatitis, unrecognized contact allergy, or unrecognized clinical relevance of identified allergies owing to incomplete or wrong product ingredient information must always be considered

Patch test results with the European baseline series and additions thereof in the ESSCA network, 2015-2018

Background: Clinical surveillance of the prevalence of contact allergy in consecutively patch tested patients is a proven instrument to continually assess the importance of contact allergens (haptens) assembled in a baseline series. Objectives: To present current results from the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies, including 13 countries represented by 1 to 11 departments. Methods: Anonymized or pseudonymized patch test and clinical data from various data capture systems used locally or nationally as transferred to the Erlangen data centre were pooled and descriptively analysed after quality control. Results: In the 4 years (2015-2018), data from 51 914 patients patch tested with the European baseline series (EBS) of contact allergens were analysed. Contact allergy to nickel was most frequent (17.6% positive), followed by contact allergy to fragrance mix I (6.9%), methylisothiazolinone (MI; 6.2%), and Myroxylon pereirae resin (balsam of Peru; 5.8%). Conclusions: While the prevalence of MI contact allergy decreased substantially following regulatory intervention, the persistently high levels of allergy to metals, fragrances, other preservatives, and rubber chemicals point to problems needing further research and, potentially, preventive efforts. Results with national additions to the baseline series provide important information on substances possibly to be considered for inclusion in the EBS

European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA): polysensitization, 2009-2014

Polysensitization, defined as being allergic to three or more haptens from the European baseline series, is considered to reflect increased susceptibility to developing a contact allergy, and is likely to be associated with an impaired quality of life

European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA):polysensitization, 2009-2014

Polysensitization, defined as being allergic to three or more haptens from the European baseline series, is considered to reflect increased susceptibility to developing a contact allergy, and is likely to be associated with an impaired quality of life