Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Wound Dressing Allergic Contact Dermatitis: Epidemiology and Management

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Local Wound Care for Dermatologists

Part of the book series: Updates in Clinical Dermatology ((UCD))

  • 801 Accesses

Abstract

Chronic wound care represents a growing healthcare cost and is responsible for considerable morbidity. Contact dermatitis, classified as irritant contact dermatitis (ICD) or allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), represents an area for potential improvement among healthcare practitioners and wound care product manufacturers to optimize healing time and healthcare outcomes in chronic wound patients. ACD and ICD in the setting of wound care require special management by healthcare practitioners, while manufacturers should strive to remove all common allergens from wound care products.

The following discussion will analyze the most current complete studies on contact dermatitis in wound care, review proper management of contact dermatitis in wound care, and include a discussion of methods to extract an allergen from a product for the experimentally minded physician.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 69.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 119.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Tan C-H, Rasool S, Johnston GA. Contact dermatitis: allergic and irritant. Clin Dermatol. 2014;32(1):116–24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clindermatol.2013.05.033.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Marks JG, DeLeo VA. Contact & occupational dermatology. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers, Medical Publishers Pvt. Limited; 2016.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mowad CM, Anderson B, Scheinman P, Pootongkam S, Nedorost S, Brod B. Allergic contact dermatitis: patient management and education. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;74(6):1043–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2015.02.1144.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Lachapelle JM, Maibach HI. Patch testing and prick testing: A practical guide official publication of the ICDRG. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer; 2012.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  5. Taylor JS, Amado A. 2010. Contact dermatitis and related conditions. http://www.clevelandclinicmeded.com/medicalpubs/diseasemanagement/dermatology/contact-dermatitis-and-related-conditions/. Accessed 25 Oct 2017.

  6. Valois A, Waton J, Avenel-Audran M, Truchetet F, Collet E, Raison-Peyron N, et al. Contact sensitization to modern dressings: a multicentre study on 354 patients with chronic leg ulcers. Contact Dermatitis. 2014;72(2):90–6. https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12307.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Alavi A, Sibbald RG, Ladizinski B, Saraiya A, Lee KC, Skotnicki-Grant S, et al. Wound-related allergic/irritant contact dermatitis. Adv Skin Wound Care. 2016;29(6):278–86. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.ASW.0000482834.94375.1e.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Smart V, Alavi A, Coutts P, Fierheller M, Coelho S, Holness DL, et al. Contact allergens in persons with leg ulcers: a Canadian study in contact sensitization. Int J Low Extrem Wounds. 2008;7(3):120–5. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534734608322608.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Lehnen M, Kohaus S, Körber A, Hillen U, Grabbe S, Dissemond J. Kontaktsensibilisierungen von Patienten mit chronischen Wunden. Hautarzt. 2006;57(4):303–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00105-005-1053-z.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Erfurt-Berge C, Geier J, Mahler V. The current spectrum of contact sensitization in patients with chronic leg ulcers or stasis dermatitis – new data from the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK). Contact Dermatitis. 2017;77(3):151–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12763.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Barbaud A, Collet E, Le Coz CJ, Meaume S, Gillois P. Contact allergy in chronic leg ulcers: results of a multicentre study carried out in 423 patients and proposal for an updated series of patch tests. Contact Dermatitis. 2009;60(5):279–87. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2009.01541.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. DeKoven JG, Warshaw EM, Belsito DV, Sasseville D, Maibach HI, Taylor JS, et al. North American contact dermatitis group patch test results 2013–2014. Dermatitis. 2017;28(1):33–46. https://doi.org/10.1097/der.0000000000000225.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Uter W, Amario-Hita JC, Balato A, Ballmer-Weber B, Bauer A, Belloni Fortina A, et al. European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA): results with the European baseline series, 2013/14. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2017;31(9):1516–25. https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.14423.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Saap L, Fahim S, Arsenault E, et al. Contact sensitivity in patients with leg ulcerations: a North American study. Arch Dermatol. 2004;140(10):1241–6. https://doi.org/10.1001/archderm.140.10.1241.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fransen M, Overgaard LEK, Johansen JD, Thyssen JP. Contact allergy to lanolin: temporal changes in prevalence and association with atopic dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;78(1):70–5. https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12872.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Matthieu L, Dockx P. Discrepancy in patch test results with wool wax alcohols and Amerchol® L-101. Contact Dermatitis. 1997;36(3):150–1. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1997.tb00398.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Maibach H. Lanolin hypersensitivity: dermatologic considerations. Proceedings international symposium: Lanolin and Lanolin Derivatives. New York: Long Island University; 1980. p. 42–50.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kligman AM. The myth of lanolin allergy. Contact Dermatitis. 1998;39(3):103–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1998.tb05856.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Vandebuerie L, Aerts C, Goossens A. Allergic contact dermatitis resulting from multiple colophonium-related allergen sources. Contact Dermatitis. 2014;70(2):117–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12144.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Downs AMR, Sansom JE. Colophony allergy: a review. Contact Dermatitis. 1999;41(6):305–10. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1999.tb06178.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Gehrig KA, Warshaw EM. Allergic contact dermatitis to topical antibiotics: epidemiology, responsible allergens, and management. J Am Acad Dermatol. 58(1):1–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2007.07.050.

  22. Björnberg A. Skin reactions to primary irritants in patients with hand eczema: an investigation with matched controls. Göteborg; 1968. https://books.google.com/books/about/Skin_reactions_to_primary_irritants_in_p.html?id=OvRsAAAAMAAJ.

  23. De Groot A. Patch testing, 3rd Edition: Update 2008–2015. 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Trancik RJ, Maibach HI. Propylene glycol: irritation or sensitization? Contact Dermatitis. 1982;8(3):185–9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1982.tb04180.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Lessmann H, Schnuch A, Geier J, Uter W. Skin-sensitizing and irritant properties of propylene glycol. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;53(5):247–59. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2005.00693.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Basketter DA, Marriott M, Gilmour NJ, White IR. Strong irritants masquerading as skin allergens: the case of benzalkonium chloride. Contact Dermatitis. 2004;50(4):213–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2004.00331.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Foussereau J, Benezra C, Maibach HI. Occupational contact dermatitis: clinical and chemical aspects. Copenhagen: Munksgaard; 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Ashcroft DM, Dimmock P, Garside R, Stein K, Williams HC. Efficacy and tolerability of topical pimecrolimus and tacrolimus in the treatment of atopic dermatitis: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials. BMJ. 2005;330(7490):516. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.38376.439653.D3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Levin C, Zhai H, Bashir S, Chew AL, Anigbogu A, Stern R, et al. Efficacy of corticosteroids in acute experimental irritant contact dermatitis? Skin Res Technol. 2001;7(4):214–8. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0846.2001.70402.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Van der Valk P, Maibach H. Do topical corticosteroids modulate skin irritation in human beings? Assessment by trans- epidermal water loss and visual scoring. J Am Acad Derm. 1989;21:519–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Le TKM, Mon P, Schalkwuk J, Valk PGM. Effect of a topical corticosteroid, a retinoid and a vitamin D3 derivative on sodium dodecyl sulphate induced skin irritation. Contact Dermatitis. 1997;37(1):19–26. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1997.tb00369.x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Ramsing DW, Agner T. Efficacy of topical corticosteroids on irritant skin reactions. Contact Dermatitis. 1995;32:293–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Berardesca E, Distante F, Vignoli G, et al. Acute irritant dermatitis: effect of short-term topical corticoid treatment. In: Surber C, Elsner P, Bircher A, editors. Exogenous dermatology. Basel: Karger; 1995. p. 86–90.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Louisiana State University School of Medicine, New Orleans, LA, USA

    John Havens Cary

  2. Howard University Hospital, Department of Dermatology, Washington, DC, USA

    Becky S. Li

  3. Dermatology Service, Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Rasika Reddy

  4. Department of Dermatology, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Howard I. Maibach

Authors
  1. John Havens Cary
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Becky S. Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Rasika Reddy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Howard I. Maibach
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John Havens Cary .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Women’s College Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Afsaneh Alavi

  2. Department of Dermatology, University of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Howard I. Maibach

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Cary, J.H., Li, B.S., Reddy, R., Maibach, H.I. (2020). Wound Dressing Allergic Contact Dermatitis: Epidemiology and Management. In: Alavi, A., Maibach, H. (eds) Local Wound Care for Dermatologists. Updates in Clinical Dermatology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28872-3_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28872-3_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-28871-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-28872-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation