Antonella Tammaro

Chello Camilla

Enza Gelormini

Flavia Pigliacelli

Francesca Magri

Francesca Romana Parisella

Severino Persechino

English

Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia

339ACTA DERMATOVENEROLOGICA CROATICAFigure 1. Erythematous and squamous plaques localized at the pre-auricular and auricular region of the left ear. These lesions varied in size from 1 to 4 cm.Allergic Contact Dermatitis to a Cell PhoneActa Dermatovenerol Croat                            2018;26(4):339-340                               LETTEr To ThE EDiTorDear Editor,Nickel is a ubiquitous allergen and an important cause of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Sensitized patients generally develop a localized eruption after cutaneous exposure to nickel, characterized by ery-thema, vesicles, eczematous plaques, and itching. Nickel is frequently found in several everyday ob-jects. it is used in numerous industrial and consumer products, including stainless steel, magnets, metal plating, coinage, and special alloys, and is therefore almost impossible to completely avoid in daily life (1). This metal may be found in a wide variety of items, such as jewelry, belt buckles, buttons, glasses, coins, and keys. More recently, items such as mobile phones, laptop computers, video game controllers, and other technological accessories have also been identified as a source of nickel.The use of mobile phones has risen exponen-tially in recent decades. Nickel has been detected in cell phones, and reports of contact dermatitis due to metals contained in cell phones are present in the lit-erature (2,3). Allergic contact dermatitis to a mobile phone was first described in 2000, when Pazzaglia et al. reported two cases of nickel allergy due to mobile phone use (4).in addition to nickel, cobalt, which is frequently used in hard metal alloys and observed to be pres-ent in mobile phones, is a frequent cause of allergic contact dermatitis (5).herein we present a case of allergic contact der-matitis, possibly caused by the use of a mobile phone. A 38-year-old woman was admitted to our Depart-Formaldehyde resinFragrance mixNickel sulfateParaben mixPara-phenylenediamineresorcinolQuaterniumDisperse redDisperse blueEthylenediaminePotassium dichromateNeomycin sulfateMercapto mixEpoxy resinColophonyCobalt chlorideBalsam of PeruLanolinBenzocaineimidazolidynil-ureaTable 1. Patch test SiDAPA series (SiDAPA: Soci-età Italiana di Dermatologia Allergologica, Profes-sionale e Ambientale)  Table 2. Patch test Metal seriesMolybdenumCopperGoldAluminumChromeLeadCadmiumironSilverStannic chlorideZincPalladiumPlatinumACTA DERMATOVENEROLOGICA CROATICA340ment of Dermatology for the presence of a pruritic eczematous solitary lesion on the face. At physical investigation, we observed the presence of confluent erythematous and squamous plaques localized at the pre-auricular and auricular region of the left ear. These lesions varied in size from 1 to 4 cm (Figure 1). As reported by the patient, the symptoms had been present for 6 months. No other cutaneous diseases or photodermatoses were reported.As reported by the patient during the anamnestic interview, she worked as a manager for a big com-mercial company and used to spend many hours per day using her cell phone. She had a familiar history of atopic dermatitis and a personal history of metal allergy. A patch test SiDAPA series was performed (Table 1). After 48 hours, the patch was removed and a pre-liminary reading of the skin was done. The final read-ing was performed after 72 hours from the patch ap-plication. The test was positive for nickel sulfate (++ after 48 hours and +++ after 72 hours) and for cobalt chloride (+ after 48 hours and ++ after 72 hours). We also performed a patch test Metal series (Table 2), which was negative at 48 and 72 hours.Based on the patch test results and the informa-tion revealed by the patient, we hypothesized a trig-gering role of the cell phone to the onset of the pre-auricular dermatitis. This hypothesis stems from the literature regarding cases of dermatitis due to aller-genic metals contained in cell phones. oral antihistamines and topical steroids were pre-scribed to treat the eczematous plaques. After one week of therapy, a partial improvement of the skin condition was observed. in line with our hypothesis of a causal role of the cell phone, our patient’s dermatitis completely dis-appeared when her usual auricular contact with her mobile phone was avoided. Following our sugges-tion, the patient started to use the speakerphone when needed. Six months later, she had a complete remission of the cutaneous lesions and did not pres-ent recurrences of the auricular dermatitis. Dermatologists should be aware that mobile phone dermatitis is an emerging phenomenon, espe-cially among young adults and adolescents. Despite efforts to control the presence of allergen metals in phones, many phones present levels of metals such as nickel and cobalt, known to induce allergic contact dermatitis. in conclusion, it is important to suspect this diag-nosis in case of patients with dermatitis of the face, neck, hands, or auricular region, especially when the lesions are unilateral. Patch test for common metal al-lergens may be helpful for diagnosis. References:1.  Torres F, Das Graças M, Melo M, Tosti A. Mana-gement of contact dermatitis due to nickel al-lergy: an update. Clin Cosmet investig Dermatol. 2009;2:39-48.2.  richardson C, hamamm Cr, hamann D, Thys-sen JP. Mobile phone dermatitis in children and adults: A review of the literature. Pediatr Allergy immunol Pulmonol. 2014;27:60-9.3.  Pazzaglia M, Lucente P, Vincenzi C, Tosti A. Contact dermatitis from nickel in mobile phones. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;42:362-3.4.  Aquino M, Mucci T, Chong M. Lorton MD, Fonacier L. Mobile phones: potential sources of nickel and cobalt exposure for metal allergic patients. Pedia-tr Allergy immunol Pulmonol. 2013;26:181-6.5.  Berk Dr, Bayliss SJ. Cellular phone and cellular phone accessory dermatitis due to nickel allergy: report of five cases. Pediatr Dermatol. 2011;28:327-31.Antonella Tammaro1, Francesca Magri1, Flavia Pigliacelli1, Enza Gelormini2, Romana Parisella Francesca3, Camilla Chello 1, Severino Persechino11NESMOS Department, Dermatology Unit, Sant’Andrea Hospital, Sapienza University, Rome, Italy2Medical Student, Sapienza University of Rome, Italy3Medical Student, University of Brisbane, AustraliaCorresponding author:Prof. Antonella Tammaro, MDSant’Andrea hospitalSanienza University of romevia di Grottarossa 108900100 romaitalytammaroantonella@gmail.comreceived: March 3, 2018Accepted: November 4, 2018Letter to the editor Acta Dermatovenerol Croat  2018;26(4):339-340

Allergic contact dermatitis to cell phone

Allergic contact dermatitis to cell phone

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Hrčak - Portal of scientific journals of Croatia