Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Histopathological and Immunohistopathological Features of Irritant and Allergic Contact Dermatitis

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Book cover Contact Dermatitis

Abstract

When the clinical diagnosis of allergic and/or irritant contact dermatitis is not clear-cut, skin biopsy is considered a useful tool of differential diagnosis. In contrast, biopsies of patch tests are not recommended, except for scientific purposes. Histopathological features of positive allergic patch test reactions are typical of a spongiotic dermatitis, whereas those of positive irritant patch test reactions are varied (mainly epidermal necrosis), depending on the nature and/or concentration of irritant chemicals and the reactivity of the skin. New immunocytopathological techniques are of no help in distinguishing between irritant and allergic patch test reactions, since there is little evidence of differential cytokine release.

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 299.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Wilkinson SM, Beck MH (2004) Contact dermatitis: irritant. In: Burns DA, Breathnach SM, Cox N, Griffiths CE (eds) Rook’s textbook of dermatology, 7th edn, Chap. 19. Blackwell Science, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  2. Beck MH, Wilkinson SM (2004) Contact dermatitis: allergic. In: Burns DA, Breathnach SM, Cox N, Griffiths CE (eds) Rook’s textbook of dermatology, 7th edn, Chap. 20. Blackwell Science, Oxford

    Google Scholar 

  3. Rietschel RL, Fowler JF Jr (2008) Fisher’s contact dermatitis, 6th edn. BC Decker, Hamilton

    Google Scholar 

  4. Rietschel RL, Conde-Salazar L, Goossens A, Veien NK (1999) Atlas of contact dermatitis. Dunitz, London

    Google Scholar 

  5. Kerl H, Burg G, Braun-Falco O (1974) Quantitative and qualitative dynamics of the epidermal and cellular inflammatory reaction in primary toxic and allergic dinitrochlorobenzene contact dermatitis in guinea pigs. Arch Dermatol Forsch 249:207–226

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Queille-Roussel C, Graeber M, Thurston M, Lachapelle JM, Decroix J, de Cuyper C, Ortonne JP (2000) SDZ ASM 981 is the first non-steroid that suppresses established nickel contact dermatitis elicited by allergen challenge. Contact Dermat 42:349–350

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Alomar A, Puig L, Gallardo CM, Valenzuela N (2003) Topical tacrolimus 0.1% ointment (Protopic®) reverses nickel contact dermatitis elicited by allergen challenge to a similar degree to mometasone furoate 0.1% with greater suppression of late erythema. Contact Dermat 49:185–188

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Angelini G, Vena GA, Filotico R, Tursi A (1990) Mast cell participation in allergic contact sensitivity. Contact Dermat 23:239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Hannuksela M, Salo H (1986) The repeated open application test (ROAT). Contact Dermat 14:221–227

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Lazarov A, Cordoba M (2000) Purpuric contact dermatitis in patients with allergic reaction to textile dyes and resins. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 14:101–105

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Fleming C, Burden D, Fallowfield M et al (1997) Lymphomatoid contact reaction to gold earrings. Contact Dermat 37:298–299

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lachapelle JM (1973) Comparative histopathology of allergic and irritant patch test reactions in man. Current concepts and new prospects. Arch Belg Dermatol 28:83–92

    Google Scholar 

  13. Mahmoud G, Lachapelle JM (1985) Evaluation expérimentale de l’efficacité de crèmes barrière et de gels antisolvants dans la prévention de l’irritation cutanée provoquée par des solvants organiques. Cah Med Trav 22:163–168

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Willis CM, Stephens CJM, Wilkinson JD (1989) Epidermal damage induced by irritants in man: a light and electron microscopic study. J Invest Dermatol 93:695–699

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Willis CM, Stephens CJM, Wilkinson JD (1989) Preliminary findings on the patterns of epidermal damage induced by irritants in man. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goossens A, Lachapelle JM, Rycroft RJ, Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin, pp 42–45

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Willis CM, Stephens CJM, Wilkinson JD (1993) Differential patterns of epidermal leukocyte infiltration in patch test reactions to structurally unrelated chemical irritants. J Invest Dermatol 101:364–370

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Medenica M, Rostenberg A (1971) A comparative light and electron microscopic study of primary irritant contact dermatitis and allergic contact dermatitis. J Invest Dermatol 56:259–271

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Lachapelle JM (1972) Comparative study of 3H-thymidine labelling of the dermal infiltrate of skin allergic and irritant patch test reactions in man. Br J Dermatol 87:460–465

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Grosshans E, Lachapelle JM (1982) Comparative histo- and cytopathology of allergic and irritant patch test reactions in Man. In: Foussereau J, Benezra C, Maibach H (eds) Occupational contact dermatitis. Clinical and chemical aspects. Munksgaard, Copenhagen, pp 63–69

    Google Scholar 

  20. Nater JP, Hoedemaeker PHJ (1976) Histopathological differences between irritant and allergic patch test reactions in man. Contact Dermat 2:247–253

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Avnstorp C, Balslev E, Thomsen HK (1989) The occurrence of different morphological parameters in allergic and irritant patch test reactions. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goossens A, Lachapelle JM, Rycroft RJ, Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin, pp 38–41

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  22. Vestergaard L, Clemmensen OJ, Sorensen FB, Andersen KE (1999) Histological distinction between early allergic and irritant patch test reactions: follicular spongiosis may be characteristic of early allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermat 41:207–210

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Belsito DV (1999) The molecular basis of allergic contact dermatitis. In: Dyall-Smith D, Marks R (eds) Dermatology at the millennium. The Proceedings of the 19th World Congress of Dermatology. Parthenon, New York, pp 217–223

    Google Scholar 

  24. Ferguson J, Gibbs JH, Beck JS (1985) Lymphocyte subsets and Langerhans cells in allergic and irritant patch test reactions: histometric studies. Contact Dermat 13:166–174

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Christensen OB, Daniels TE, Maibach HI (1986) Expression of OKT6 antigen by Langerhans cells in patch test reactions. Contact Dermat 14:26–31

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Brasch J, Mielke V, Kÿnne N, Weber-Matthiesen V, Bruhn S, Sterry W (1990) Immigration of cells and composition of cell infiltrates in patch test reactions. Contact Dermat 23:238

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Kanerva L, Ranki A, Lauharanta J (1984) Lymphocytes and Langerhans cells in patch tests. An immuno-histochemical and electron microscopic study. Contact Dermat 11:150–155

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Willis CM, Young E, Brandon DR, Wilkinson JD (1986) Immunopathological and ultrastructural findings in human allergic and irritant contact dermatitis. Br J Dermatol 115:305–316

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Illis CM, Wilkinson JD (1990) Changes in the morphology and density of epidermal Langerhans cells (CD1 + cells) in irritant contact dermatitis. Contact Dermat 23:239

    Google Scholar 

  30. Scheynius A, Fischer T (1986) Phenotypic difference between allergic and irritant patch test reactions in man. Contact Dermat 14:297–302

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Hoeffaker S, Caubo M, Van’t Erve EH (1995) In vivo cytokine profiles in allergic and irritant contact dermatitis. Contact Dermat 33:258–266

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Ulfgren AK, Klareskog L, Lindberg M (2000) An immunohistochemical analysis of cytokine expression in allergic and irritant contact dermatitis. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 80:167–170

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Rustemeyer T (2004) Immunological aspects of environmental and occupational contact allergies. Thela Thesis, Amsterdam

    Google Scholar 

  34. Flier J, Boorsma DM, Bruynzeel DP, van Beek PJ, Stoof TJ, Scheper RJ, Willemze R, Tensen CP (1999) The CXCR3 activating chemokines IP-10, MIG and IP-9 are expressed in allergic but not in irritant patch test reactions. J Invest Dermatol 113:574–578

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Tensen CP, Flier J, van der Raaij-Helmer EM, Sampat-Sardjoepersad S, van den Schors RC, Leurs R, Scheper RJ, Boorsma DM, Willemze R (1999) Human IP-9: a keratinocyte derived high affinity CXC-chemokine ligand for the IP-10/Mig receptor (CXCR3). J Invest Dermatol 112: 716–722

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Dermatology, Catholic University of Louvain, 30, Clos Chapelle-aux-Champs, UCL 3033, 1200, Brussels, Belgium

    Jean-Marie Lachapelle & Liliane Marot

Authors
  1. Jean-Marie Lachapelle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Liliane Marot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jean-Marie Lachapelle .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept. Dermatology, Amtssygehuset Gentofte, Niels Andersens Vej 65, Hellerup, 2900, Denmark

    Jeanne Duus Johansen

  2. Klinikzentrum Mitte, Hautklinik, Städtische Kliniken Dortmund, Beurhausstr. 40, Dortmund, 44137, Germany

    Peter J. Frosch

  3. Labo. Dermatochimie, Institut le Bel, rue Blaise Pascal 4, Strasbourg CX, 67070, France

    Jean-Pierre Lepoittevin

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Lachapelle, JM., Marot, L. (2011). Histopathological and Immunohistopathological Features of Irritant and Allergic Contact Dermatitis. In: Johansen, J., Frosch, P., Lepoittevin, JP. (eds) Contact Dermatitis. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03827-3_9

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03827-3_9

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-03826-6

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-03827-3

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation