Advertisement

Abstract

One of the most important branches of the chemical industry is the polymer industry, which uses a wider variety of chemicals than any other. Plastic materials are more frequently used in daily living than ever before. Plastics come from oil and 5% of the total oil production in the world is used by the polymer industry. The number of commercially important plastics today is more than 50. Application areas for plastics are many and varied: the construction industry, packaging, electronics, recreation, medical, etc.; 30% of base plastics are used for packaging and 20% in the construction industry.

Keywords

Contact Dermatitis Allergic Contact Dermatitis Unsaturated Polyester Skin Problem Contact Allergy 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Freeman S, Lee M-S, Gudmundsen K (1995) Adverse contact reactions to sculptured acrylic nails: 4 case reports and a literature review. Contact Dermatitis 33: 381–385PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Koppula SV, Feldman JH, Storrs FJ (1995) Screening allergens for acrylate dermatitis associated with artificial nails. Am J Contact Dermat 6 (2): 78–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kanerva L, Lauerma A, Estlander T et al (1996) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by photobonded sculptured nails and a revieiw of (meth)acrylates in nail cosmetics. Am J Contact Dermat 7 (2): 109–115PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hemmer W, Focke M, Wantke F et al (1996) Allergic contact dermatitis to artificial fingernails prepared from UV light-cured acrylates. J Am Acad Dermatol 35: 377–380PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Fisher AA (1990) Adverse nail reactions and paresthesia from “photobonded acrylate ”sculptured“ nails”. Cutis 45: 293–294PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R, Tarvainen K (1994) Dermatitis from acrylates in dental personnel. In: Menne T, Maibach HI (eds) Hand eczema. CRC Press, Boca Raton, p 231–273Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R (1989) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from acrylates: observations concering anaerobic acrylic sealants and dental composite resins. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goossens,A, Lachapelle J-M, Rycroft RJG, Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, p 352–359CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dahlquist I, Fregert S, Trulsson L (1983) Contact allergy to trimethylolpropane triacrylate ( TMPTA) in an aziridine plastic hardener. Contact Dermatitis 9: 122–124Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cofield BG, Storrs FJ, Strawn CB (1985) Contact allergy to aziridine paint hardener. Arch Dermatol 9121: 373–376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R et al (1995) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis and contact urticaria caused by polyfunctional aziridine hardener. Contact Dermatitis 33: 304–309PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dempsey KJ (1962) Hypersensitivity to Sta-Lok® and Loctite® anaerobic sealants. J Am Acad Dermatol 7: 779–784CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Ranchoff RE, Taylor JS (1985) Contact dermatitis to anaerobic sealants. J Am Acad Dermatol 13: 1015–1020PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Conde-Salazar L, Guimaraens D, Romero LV (1988) Occupational allergic contact dermtitis from anaerobic acrylic sealants. Contact Dermatitis 18: 129–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    van der Walle HB (1982) Sensitizing potential of acrylic monomers in guinea pig. Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit to Nijmegen, Holland, Kripps Repro MeppelGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Waegemaekers T (1985) Some toxicological aspects of acrylic monomers, notably with reference to the skin. Thesis, Katholieke Universiteit to Nijmegen, HollandGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Parker D, Turk JL (1983) Contact sensitivity to acrylate compounds in guinea pigs. Contact Dermatitis 9: 55–60PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Björkner B (1981) Sensitization capacity of acrylated prepolymers in ultraviolet curing inks tested in the guinea pig. Acta Derm Venereol 61: 7–10PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Cavelier C, Jelen G, Herve-Bazin Bet al (1981) Irritation et allergic aux acrylates et methacrylates, Premiere partie, Monoacrylates et monomethacrylates simples. Ann Dermatol Verereol 108: 549–556Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Björkner B, Niklasson B, Persson K (1984) The sensitizing potential of di(meth)acrylates based on bisphenol A or epoxy resin in the guinea pig. Contact Demartitis 10: 286–304CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Björkner B (1982) Sensitization capacity of polyester methacrylate in ultraviolet curing inks tested in the guinea pig. Acta Derm Venereol 62: 153–182PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Björkner B (1984) Sensitizing potential of urethane (meth)acrylates in the guinea pig. Contact Dermatitis 11: 115–119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Björkner B (1984) Sensitizing capacity of ultraviolet curable acrylic compounds. Thesis, University of Lund, Lund, SwedenGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Beurey J, Mougeolle J-M, Weber M (1976) Accidents cutanes des resines acryliques dans l’imprimerie. Ann Derm Syph (Paris) 103: 423–430Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Malten KE, den Arend JACJ, Wiggers RE (1979) Delayed irritation: Hexanediol diacrylate and butanediol diacrylate. Contact Dermatitis 5: 178–184Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Nethercott JR, Gupta S, Rosen C et al (1984) Tetraethylene glycol diacrylate. A cause of delayed cutaneous irritant reaction and allergic contact dermatitis. J Occup Med 26: 513–516Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Finnish Advisory Board of Chemicals (1992) Acrylate Compounds, Uses and Evaluation of Health Effects, Government Printing Office, Helsinki, Finland, 1Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Kanerva L, Björkner B, Estlander T et al (1996) Plastic materials: occupational exposure, skin irritancy and its prevention. In: van der Valk PGM, Maibach HI (eds) The irritant contact dermatitis syndrome. CRC Press, Boca Raton, p 127–155Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Roberts DW (1987) Structure-activity relationships for skin sensitisation potential of diacrylates and dimethacrylates. Contact Dermatitis 17: 281–289PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Kanazawa Y, Yoshida T, Kojima K (1999) Structure-activity relationships in allergic contact dermatitis induced by methacrylates. Studies of the influence of side-chain length of methacrylates. Contact Dermatitis 40: 19–23Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Nethercott JR, Jakubovic HR, Pilger C et al (1982) Allergic contact dermatitis due to urethane acrylate in ultraviolet cured inks. Br J Ind Med 40: 241–250Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bang Pedersen N, Senning A, Otkjaer Nielsen A (1983) Different sensitizing acrylic monomers in NAPP printing plate. Contact Dermatitis 9: 459–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Björkner B (1984) Contact allergy to 2-hydroxypropyl methacrylate (2-HPMA) in an ultraviolet curable ink. Acta Derm Venereol 64: 264–267PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Malten KE, Bende WM (1976) 2-Hydroxy-ethyl methacrylate and di-and tetraethylene glycol dimethacrylate: contact sensitizers in photoprepolymer printing plate procedure.Contact Dermatitis 5:214–220Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R (1994) Occupational skin allergy in dental profession. In: Taylor S (ed) Dermatologic clinics, vol 12, no 3, p 517–532Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kanerva L, Henriks-Eckerman M-L, Estlander T et al (1994) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis and composition of acrylates in dental bonding systems. J Eur Acad Derm Venereol 3: 157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R (1995) 10 years of patch testing with the (meth)acrylate series. Contact dermatitis 37: 255–258Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R (1995) Dental problems. In: Guin JD (ed) Practical contact dermatitis. McGraw-Hill, Nes York, p 397Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    Whittington CW (1981) Dermatitis from UV acrylate in adhesive. Contact Dermatitis 7: 203PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Fregert S (1983) Occupational hazards of acrylate bone cement in orthopedic surgery. Acta Orthop Scand 54: 787PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R (1989) Allergic contact dermatitis from dental composite resins due to aromatic epoxy acrylates and aliphatic acrylates. Contact Dermatitis 20: 201PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Bohling HG, Borchard U, Drouin H (1977) Monomeric methylmethacrylate acts on desheathed myelinated nerve and on node of Ranvier. Arch Toxicol 38: 307PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kanerva L, Verkkala E (1986) Electron microscopy and immunohistochemistry of toxic and allergic effects of methylmethacrylate on the skin. Arch Toxicol Suppl 9: 456PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Matthias CGT, Turner MC, Maibach HI (1979) Contact dermatitis and gastrointestinal symptoms from hydroxyethyl methacrylate. Br J Dermatol 110: 447CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Edwards PM (1975) Neurotoxicity of acrylamide and its analogues and effects of these analogues and other agents on acrylamides neuropathy. Br J Ind Med 31–38Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Balda BR (1971) Allergic contact dermatitis due to acrylonitrile. Contact Dermatitis Newslett 9: 219Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Balda BR (1975) Akrylonitril als Kontaktallergen. Hautarzt 26: 599–601PubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Romaquera C, Grimalt F, Vilaplana J (1985) Methyl methacrylate prosthesis dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 12: 172CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Bakker RJG, Jongen SM, van-Neer FC et al (1991) Occupational contact dermatitis due to acrylonitrile. Contact Dermatitis 1: 50–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Malten KE (1987) Printing plate manufacturing processes. In: Maibach HI (ed) Occupational and industrial dermatology, 2nd edn. Year Book Medical Publishers, Chicago, p 351–366Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Malten KE, van der Meer-Roosen CH, Seutter E (1978) Nyloprint-sensitive patients react to NN’-methylene-bis-acrylamide. Contact Dermatitis 4: 214–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Pedersen NB, Chevallier M-A, Senning A (1982) Secondary acrylamides in Nyloprint printing plate as a source of contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 8: 256–262PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Dooms-Goossens A, Garmyn M, Degreff H (1991) Contact allergy to acrylamide. Contact Dermatitis 24: 71–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Lambert J, Matthieu L, Dockx P (1988) Contact dermatitis from acrylamide. Contact Dermatitis 19: 65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Pye RJ, Peachey RD (1976) Contact dermatitis due to nyloprint. Contact Dermatitis 2: 144–146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Wang M-T, Wenger K, Maibach HI (1997) Piperazine diacrylamide allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 37: 300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Calnan CD (1979) Cyanoacrylate dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 5: 165–167PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Malten KE (1982) Old and new, mainly occupational dermatological problems in the production and processing of plastics. In: Maibach HI, Gellin GA (eds) Occupational and industrial dermatology. Year Book Medical Publishers, Chicago, p 237–238Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Jacobs MC, Rycroft RJG (1995) Allergic contact dermatitis from cyanoacrylate? Contact Dermatitis 33: 71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Fitzgerald DA, Bhaggoe R, English JSC (1995) Contact sensitivity to cyanoacrylate nailadhesive with dermatitis at remote sites. Contact Dermatitis 32: 175–176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Tomb RR, Lepoittevin J-P, Durepaire F et al (1993) Ectopic contact dermatitis from ethylcyanoacrylate instant adhesives. Contact Dermatitis 28: 206–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Belsito D (1987) Contact dermatitis to ethyl cyanoacrylate containing glue. Contact Dermatitis 17: 234–236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Pigatto P D, Giacchetta A, Altornare GF (1986) Unusual sensitization to cyanoacrylate ester. Contact Dermatitis 14: 193PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Fisher AA (1985) Reactions to cyanoacrylate adhesives: “Instant glue”. Cutis 35: 18PubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Bruze M, Björkner B, Lepoittevin J-P (1995) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from ethyl-cyanoacrylate. Contact Dermatitis 32: 156–159PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Björkner B, Niklasson B (1984) Influence of the vehicle on elicitation of contact allergic reactions to acrylic compounds in the guinea pic. Contact Dermatitis 11: 268–278PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Pegum JS, Medhurst FA (1971) Contact dermatitis from penetration of rubber gloves by acrylic monomer. Br Med J 2: 141–143PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Rietschel RL, Huggins R, Levy N, Pruitt PM (1984) In vivo and in vitro testing of gloves for protection against UV-curable acrylate resin systems. Contact Dermatitis 11: 279–282PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Munksgaard EC (1992) Premeability of protective gloves to (di)methacrylates in resinous dental materials. Scand J Dent Res 100: 189–192PubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Andersson T, Bruze M, Björkner B (1999) In vivo t esting of the protection of gloves against acrylates in dentin-bonding systems on patients with known contact allergy to acrylates. Contact Dermatitis 41: 254–259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Estlander T, Jolanki R (1988) How to protect the hands. In: Taylor JS (ed) Occupational dermatoses. Saunders, Philadelphia, p 105 (Dermatological clinics, vol 6 ), 105–114Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R (1988) Sensitization to patch test acrylates. Contact Dermatitis 18: 10–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Muskopf JW, McCollister SB (1987) Epoxy resins. In: Gerhartz W, Yamamoto YS, Kaudy L, Rounsavill JF, Schulx G (eds) Ullmann’s encyclopedia of industrial chemistry, 5th completely revised edn, vol A9. VCH Verlagsgesellschaft, Weinheim, p 547–569Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Fregert S (1981) Manual of contact dermatitis, 2nd edn. Munksgaard, CopenhagenGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Fregert S (1987) Contact dermatitis from epoxy resin systems. In: Maibach HI (ed) Occupational and industrial dermatology, 2nd edn. Year Book Medical Publishers, Chicago, pp. 285–288Google Scholar
  75. 75.
    Burrows D, Fregert S, Campbell H, Trulsson L (1984) Contact dermatitis from the epoxy resins tetraglycidyl-4,4’-methylene dianiline and o-diglycidyl phthalate in composite material. Contact Dermatitis 11: 80–82PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Thorgeirsson A, Fregert S, Magnusson B (1975) Allergenicity of epoxy-reactive diluents in the guinea pig. Derm Beruf Umwelt 23: 178–183Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Jolanki R (1991) Occupational skin diseases from epoxy compounds. Epoxy resin compounds, epoxy acrylates and 2,3-epoxypropyl trimethyl ammonium chloride (doctoral dissertation). Acta Derm Venerol Suppl (Stockh) 159: 1–80Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Jolanki R, Estlander T, Kanerva L (1987) Occupational contact dermatitis and contact urticaria caused by epoxy resins. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 134: 90–94Google Scholar
  79. 79.
    Birmingham DJ (1959) Clinical observations on the cutaneous effects associated with curing epoxy resins. Arch Ind Health 19: 365–367Google Scholar
  80. 80.
    Bourne LB, Milner FJM, Alberman KB (1959) Health problems of epoxy resins and amine-curing agents. Br J Ind Med 16: 81–97PubMedGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Gaul LE (1957) Sensitizing structure in epoxy resin. J Invest Dermatol 29: 311–313PubMedGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Gaul LE (1960) Sensitivity to bisphenol A. Arch Dermtol 82: 1003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Calnan CD (1975) Epoxy resin dermatitis. J Soc Occup Med 25: 123–126PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Thorgeirsson A, Fregert S (1977) Allergenicity of epoxy resins in the guinea pig. Acta Derm Venereol 58Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Fregert S, Thorgeirsson A (1977) Patch testing with low molecular oligormers of epoxy resins in humans. Contact Dermatitis 3: 353–356Google Scholar
  86. Jolanki R, Sysilampi M-L, Kanerva L, Estlander T (1989) Contact allergy to cycloaliphatic epoxy resins. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goossens A, Lalchapelle J-M, Rycroft RJG. Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, p 360–367Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Dahlquist I, Fregert S (1979) Allergic contact dermatitis from volatile epoxy hardeners and reactive diluents. 5: 406–407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Fregert S (1988) Physiochemicals methods for detection of contact allergens. In: Taylor JS (ed) Occupational dermatoses, dermatological clinics, vol 6. Saunders, Philadelphia, p 97–104Google Scholar
  89. 89.
    Fregert S, Trulsson L (1978) Simple methods for demonstration of epoxy resin of bisphenol A type. Contact Dermatitis 4: 69–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Lembo G, Balato N, Cusano F, Baldo A, Ayala F (1989) Contact dermatitis to epoxy resins in composite material. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goossens A, Lalchapelle J-M, Rycroft RJG. Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, p 377–380Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Thorgeirsson A (1978) Sensitizing capacity of epoxy resin harderners in the guinea pig. Acta Derm Venereol 58: 332–336Google Scholar
  92. 92.
    Mathias CGT (1987) Allergic contact dermatitis from a nonbisphenol A epoxy in a graphite fibre reinforced epoxy laminate. J Occup Med 29: 754–755PubMedGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Lachapelle J-M, Tennstedt D, Dumont-Fruytier M (1978) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis to isophorone diamine ( IPD) used as an epoxy resin hardener. Contact Dermatitis 4: 109–112Google Scholar
  94. 94.
    Dahlquist I, Fregert S (1979) Contact allergy to the epoxy hardener isophorone diamine ( IPD ). Contact Dermatitis 5: 120–121Google Scholar
  95. 95.
    Jolanki R, Estlander T, Kanerva L (1987) Contact allergy to an epoxy reactive diluent: 1,4-butanediol diglycidyl ether. Contact Dermatitis 16: 87–92PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Jolanki R, Kanerva L, Estlander T et al (1990) Occupational dermatoses from epoxy resin compounds. Contact Dermatitis 23: 172–183PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. 97.
    Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R (1996) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis caused by 2,4,6-tris-(dimethylaminomethyl)phenol, and review of sensitizing epoxy resin hardeners. Int J Dermatol 35: 852–856PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Krajewska D, Rudzki E (1976) Sensitivity to epoxy resins and triethylenetetramine. Contact Dermatitis 2: 135–138PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Fregert S, Rorsman H (1962) Hypersensitivity to epoxy resins with reference to the role played by bishpenol A. J Invest Dermatol 39: 471–472PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Prens EP, de Jong G, van Joost T (1986) Sensitization to epichlorohydrin and epoxy system components. Contact Dermtitis 15: 85–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    van Joost T, Roesyanto ID, Satyawan I (1990) Occupational sensitization to epichlorohydrin ( ECH) and bisphenol A during the manufacture of epoxy resin. Contact Dermatitis 22: 125–126Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    van Joost T (1988) Occupational sensitization to epichlorohydrin and epoxy resin. Contact Dermatitis 19: 278–280PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Tarvainen K, Jolanki R, Estlander T et al (1995) Contact urticaria due to airborne methylhexahydrophthalic anhydride and methyltetrahydrophthalic anhydride. Contact Dermatitis 32: 204–209PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Kanerva L, Jolanki R, Tupasela O et al (1991) Immediate and delayed allergy from epoxy resins based on diglycidyl ether of bisphenol A. Scand J Work Environ Health 17: 208–215PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Allen H, Kaidbey K (1979) Persistent photosensitivity following occupational exposure to epoxy resin. Arch Dermatol 115: 1307–1310PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Göransson K, Andersson R, Andersson G et al (1984) An outbreak of occupational photodermatosis of the face in a factory in northern Sweden. In: Berglund B, Lindvall T, Sundell J (eds) Indoor air, vol 3. Swedish Council for Building Research, Stockholm, p 367–375Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Maguire HC (1988) Experimental photoallergic contact dermatitis to bisphenol A. Acta Derm Venereol 68: 408–412PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Pegum JS (1979) Penetration of protective gloves by epoxy resin. Contact Dermatitis 5: 281–283PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Roed-Petersen J (1989) A new glove material protective against epoxy and acrylate monomer. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goossens A, Lachapelle J-M, Rycroft RJG, Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, p 603–606CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Blanken R, Nater JP, Veenhoff E (1987) Protection against epoxy resins with glove materials. Contact Dermatitis 16: 46–47PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Blanken R, Nater JP, Veenhoff, E (1987) Protective effect of barrier creams and spray coatings against epoxy resins. Contact Dermatitis 16: 79–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Bruze M (1995) Contact sensitizers in resins based on phenol and formaldehyde. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 119: 1–83Google Scholar
  113. 113.
    Elvers B, Hawkins S, Schulz G (eds) (1991) Ullmans’s Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry, 5th, completely revised edn, vol A19. VCH Verlagsgesellschaft, Weinheim, p 371Google Scholar
  114. 114.
    Estlander T, Tarvainen K, Jolanki R, Kanerva L (1993) Occupational sensitization to a resin binder used in rock wool. In: Books of abstracts, 3rd congress of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, 26–30 Sept, Copenhagen, Denmark, p 283Google Scholar
  115. 115.
    Kalimo K, Saarni H, Kyttä J (1980) Immediate and delyed type reactions to formaldehyde resin in glass wool. Contact Dermatitis 6: 496PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Foussereau J, Cavelier C, Selig D (1976) Occupational eczema from para-tertiarybutylphenol formaldehyde resins: a review of the sensitizing resins. Contact Dermatitis 2: 254–258PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Schubert H, Agatha G (1979) Zur Allergennatur der para-tert, Butylphenol-formaldehydeharze. Derm Beruf Umwelt 27: 49Google Scholar
  118. 118.
    White IR (1990) Adhesives. In: Adams RM (ed) Occupational skin disease. Saunders, Philadelphia, p 395–407Google Scholar
  119. 119.
    Zimerson E, Bruze M (1998) Contact allergy to the monomers of p-tert-butylphenol formaldehyde resin in the guinea pig Cpmtact Dermatitis. 222–226Google Scholar
  120. 120.
    Bruze M (1988) Patch testing with a mixture of 2 phenol-formaldehyde resins. Contact Dermatitis 19: 116–119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Bruze M, Zimerson E (1997) Cross-reaction patterns in patients with contact allergy to simple methylol phenols. Contact Dermatitis 37: 82–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Bruze M (1986) Simultaneous reactions to phenol-formaldehyde resins colophony/hydroabietyl alcohol and balsam of Peru/parfyme mixture. Contact Dermatitis 14: 119–120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Bruze M, Zimerson E (1985) Contact allergy to 3-methylol phenol, 2,4-dimethylol phenol and 2,6- dimethylol phenol. Acta Derm Venereol 65: 548–531PubMedGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Bruze M (1986) Sensitizing capacity of 4,4-dihydroxy-(hydroxymethyl)-diphenyl methanes in the guinea pig. Acta Derm Venereol 66: 110–116PubMedGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Fregert S (1980) Irritant dermatitis from phenol-formaldehyde resin powder. Contact Dermatitis 6: 493PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Bruze M, Fregert S, Zimerson E (1985) Contact allergy to phenol-formaldehydehyde resins. Contact Dermatitis 12: 81–86PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Bruze M, Almgren G (1988) Occupational dermatoses in workers exposed to resins based on phenol and formaldehyde. Contact Dermatitis 19: 272–277PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Bruze M (1988) Patch testing with a mixture of 2 phenol-formaldehyde resins. Contact Dermatitis 19: 116–119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    Malten KE (1964) Occupational dermatoses in the processing of plastics. Trans St John’s Hosp Dermatol Soc 59: 78Google Scholar
  130. 130.
    Estlander T, Keskinen H, Jolanki R et al (1992) Occupational dermatitis from exposure to polyurethane chemicals. Contact Dermatitis 27: 161–165PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Zeiss CR, Kanellakes TM, Bellone JD et al (1980) Immunoglobulin E-mediated asthma and hypersensitive pneumonitis with precipitating anti-hapten antibodies du to diphenylmethane diisocyanate ( MDI exposure ). J Allergy Clin Immunol 60: 346–352Google Scholar
  132. 132.
    Mowe G (1980) Health risks from isocyanates. Contact Dermatitis 8: 44–45 (extra issue)Google Scholar
  133. 133.
    Baur X (1991) Isocyanates. Clin Exp Allergy 21 [Suppl 11: 241–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Rothe A (1976) Zur Frage arbeitsbedingter Hautschädigungen durch Polyurethanchemikalien. Derm Beruf Umwelt 24: 7–24Google Scholar
  135. 135.
    Kanerva L, Lähteenmäki M-T, Estlander T, Jolanki R, Keskinen H (1989) Allergic contact dermatitis from isocyanates. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goossens A, Lachapelle J-M, Rycroft RJG, Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, p 366–379Google Scholar
  136. 136.
    Kanerva L, Estlander T, Jolanki R et al (1991) Occupational urticaria from welding polyurethane. J Am Acad Dermatol 24: 825–826PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Tanaka K, Takeoka A, Nishimura F, Hanada S (1987) Contact sensitivity induced in mice by methylene bisphenyl diisocyanate. Contact Dermatitis 17: 199–204PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    White IR, Stewart JR, Rycroft RJG (1983) Allergic contact dermatitis from an organic di-isocyanate. Contact Dermatitis 9: 300–303PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Malten KE (1984) Dermatological problems with synthetic resins and plastics in glues, part I. Derm Beruf Umwelt 32: 81–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  140. 140.
    Malten KE (1984) Dermatological problems with synthetic resins and plastics in glues, part II. Derm Beruf Umwelt 32: 118–125PubMedGoogle Scholar
  141. 141.
    Van Joost T, Heule F, De Boer J (1987) Sensitization to methylenedianiline and Para-structures. Contact Dermatitis 16: 246–248PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  142. 142.
    Emmett EA (1976) Allergic contact dermatitis in polyurethane plastic moulders. J Occup Med 18: 802–804PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  143. 143.
    Wilkinson SM, Cartwright PH, Armitage J et al (1991) Allergic contact dermatitis from 1,6diisocyanatohexane in an anti-pill finish. Contact Dermatitis 25: 94–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  144. 144.
    Fregert S (1981) Formaldehyde dermatitis from a gypsum-melamine resin mixture. Contact Dermatitis 7: 56PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  145. 145.
    Belsito DV (1993) Textile dermatitis. Am J Contact Dermatitis 4: 249Google Scholar
  146. 146.
    Ross JS, Rycroft RJG, Cronin E (1992) Melamine-formaldehyde contact dermatitis in orthopaedic practice. Contact Dermatitis 26: 203–204PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  147. 147.
    Vale PT, Rycroft RJG (1988) Occupational irritant contact dermatitis from fibreboard containing urea formaldehyde resin. Contact Dermatitis 19: 62PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  148. 148.
    Dooms-Goossens AE, Debusschere KM, Gevers DM et al (1986) Contact dermatitis caused by airborne agents. J Am Acad Dermatol 15: 1–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  149. 149.
    Mathias CGT (1988) Allergic contact dermatitis from triglycidyl isocyanurate in polyester paint pigments. Contact Dermatitis 19: 67–68PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  150. 150.
    Venables K (1989) Low molecular weight chemicals, hypersensitivity, and direct toxity: the acid anhydrides. Br J Ind Med 46: 222–292PubMedGoogle Scholar
  151. 151.
    Malten KE (1964) Occupational dermatitis in the processing of plastics. Trans St. John’s Hosp Dermatol Soc 59: 78–119Google Scholar
  152. 152.
    Wehle V (1966) Arbeitsbedingte Ekzeme durch Polyester. Allergie Asthma 12: 184–186PubMedGoogle Scholar
  153. 153.
    Lidén C, Löfström A, Storgârds-Hatam K (1984) Contact allergy to unsaturated polyester in a boatbilder. Contact Dermatitis 11: 262–264PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  154. 154.
    Dooms-Goossens A, De Jong G (1985) Letter to the editor. Contact Dermatitis 12: 238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  155. 155.
    Mac Farlane AW, Curley RK, King CM (1986) Contact sensitivity to unsaturated polyester resin in a limb prosthesis. Contact Dermatitis 15: 301–303CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  156. 156.
    Tarvainen K, Jolanki R, Estlander R (1993) Occupational contact allergy to unsaturated polyester resin cements. Contact Dermatitis 28: 220–224PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  157. 157.
    Malten KE (1984) Dermatological porblems with synthetic resins and plastics in glues, part I. Derm Beruf Umwelt 32: 81–86PubMedGoogle Scholar
  158. 158.
    Bourne L, Milner F (1963) Polyester resin hazards. Br Ind Med 20: 100–109Google Scholar
  159. 159.
    Meneghini CL, Rantuccio F, Riboldi A (1963) Klinisch-allergologische Beobachtungen bei beruflichen ekzematösen Kontakt-Dermatosen. Derm Beruf Umwelt 11: 181–244Google Scholar
  160. 160.
    Sjöborg S, Fregert S, Trulsson L (1984) Contact allergy to styrene and related chemicals. Contact Dermatitis 10: 94–96PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  161. 161.
    Schmunes E (1990) Solvents and plasticizers. In: Adams RM (ed) Occupational skin diseases, 2nd edn. Saunders, Philadelphia, p 439–461Google Scholar
  162. 162.
    Conde-Salazar L, Gonzales M, Guimaraens D et al (1989) Occupational contact dermatitis from styrene. Contact Dermatitis 21: 112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  163. 163.
    Moscato G, Biscaldi G, Cottica D et al (1987) Occupational asthma due to styrene: two case reports. J Occup Med 29: 957–960PubMedGoogle Scholar
  164. 164.
    Bruze M, Fregert S, Gruvberger B (2000) Chemical skin burns. In: Menne T, Maibach HI (eds) Hand eczema. CRC Press, Boca Raton, p 117–127Google Scholar
  165. 165.
    Vidovic R, Kansky A (1985) Contact dermatitis in workers processing polyvinyl chloride plastics. Derm Beruf Umwelt 33: 104–105PubMedGoogle Scholar
  166. 166.
    Schulsinger C, Möllegaard K (1980) Polyvinyl chloride dermatitis not caused by phthalates. Contact Dermatitis 6: 477–480PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  167. 167.
    Fregert S, Rorsman H (1963) Hypersensitivity to epoxy resins used as plasticizers and stabilizers in polyvinyl chloride resins. Acta Derm Venereol 43: 10–13PubMedGoogle Scholar
  168. 168.
    Fregert S, Trulsson L, Zimerson E (1982) Contact allergic reaction to diphenylthiourea and phenylisothiocyanate in PVC adhesive tape. Contact Dermatitis 8: 38–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  169. 169.
    Hills RJ, Ive FA (1993) Allergic contact dermatitis from di-isodecyl phthalate in a polyvinyl chloride identy band. Contact Dermatitis 29: 94–111PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  170. 170.
    Di Lernia V, Cameli N, Patrizi A (1989) Irritant dermatitis in a child by the plastic tube of infusion system. Contact Dermatitis 21: 339–353PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  171. 171.
    Osmundsen PE (1980) Contact urticaria from nickel and plastic additives, butylhydroxytoluene, oleyamide. Contact Dermatitis 6: 452–454PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  172. 172.
    Fregert S, Meding B, Trulsson L (1984) Demonstration of epoxy resin in stoma pouch plastic. Contact Dermatitis 10: 106PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  173. 173.
    Goh, CL, Ho SF (1988) An outbreak of acneiform eruption in a polyvinyl chloride manufacturing factory. Derm Beruf Umwelt 36: 53–57PubMedGoogle Scholar
  174. 174.
    Thestrup-Pedersen K, Madsen JB, Rasmussen K (1989) Cumulative skin irritance from heat-decomposed polyethylene plastic. In: Frosch PJ, Dooms-Goossens A, Lachapelle J-M, Rycroft RIG, Scheper RJ (eds) Current topics in contact dermatitis. Springer, Berlin Heidelberg New York, p 412–416CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  175. 175.
    Bruze M, Boman A, Bergqvist-Karlsson A et al (1988) Contact allergy to cyclohexanone resin in humans and guinea pigs. Contact Dermatitis 18: 46–49PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  176. 176.
    Heine A, Laubstein B (1990) Contact dermatitis from cyclohexanone-formaldehyde resin ( L2 resin) in a hair lacquer spray. Contact Dermatitis 22: 108Google Scholar
  177. 177.
    Husain SL (1975) Dibutylphthalate sensitivity. Contact Dermatitis 1 (6): 395Google Scholar
  178. 178.
    Calnan C D (1975) Dibutylphthalate. Contact Dermatitis 1 (6): 388PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  179. 179.
    Sneddon IB (1972) Dermatitis from dibutylphthalate in an aerosol anti-perspirant and deodorant. Contact Dermatitis Newslett 12: 308Google Scholar
  180. 180.
    Wilkinson SM, Beck MH (1992) Allergic contact dermatitis from dibutyl phthalate, propylgallate and hydrocortisone in Timodine®. Contact Dermatitis 27: 197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  181. 181.
    Smith EL, Calnan CD (1966) Studies in contact dermatitis XVII. Spectacle frames. Trans St John Hosp Derm Soc 52: 10–34Google Scholar
  182. 182.
    Oliwiecki S, Beck MH, Chalmers RJG (1991) Contact dermatitis from spectacle frames and hearing aid containing diethyl phthalate. Contact Dermatitis 25: 264–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  183. 183.
    Capon F, Cambie MP, Clinard F et al (1996) Occupational contact dermatitis caused by computer mice. Contact Dermatitis 35: 57–58PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  184. 184.
    Burrows D, Rycroft RJG (1981) Contact dermatitis from PTBP resin and tricresylethylphthalate in a plastic nail adhesive. Contact Dermatitis 7 (6): 336–339PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  185. 185.
    Hamanaka S, Hamanaka I, Otsuka F (1992) Phthalic acid dermatitis caused by an organostanic compound, tributyltinphthalate. Dermatology 184: 210–212PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  186. 186.
    Carlsen L, Andersen KE, Egsgaard H (1986) Triphenylphosphate allergy from spectacle frames. Contact Dermatitis 15 (5): 274–277PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  187. 187.
    Camarasa JG, Serra-Baldrich E (1992) Allergic contact dermatitis from triphenylphosphate. Contact Dermatitis 26 (4): 264–265PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  188. 188.
    Andersen KE (1977) Sensitivity to a flame retardant, tris(2,3-dibromopropyl)phosphate (Firemaster L V T 23 P). Contact Dermatitis 3: 297–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  189. 189.
    Niklasson B, Björkner B (1989) Contact allergy to the UV-absorber Tinuvin P in plastics. Contact Dermatitis 21: 330–334PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  190. 190.
    Ikarashi Y, Tsuchiya T, Nakamura A (1994) Contact sensitivity to Tinuvin Pin mice. Contact Dermatitis 30 (4): 226–250PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  191. 191.
    Kanerva L, Jolanki R, Estlander T (1985) Organic pigment as a cause of plastic glove dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 13: 41–43PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  192. 192.
    Jolanki R, Kanerva L, Estlander T (1987) Organic pigments in plastics can cause allergic contact dermatitis. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 134: 95–97Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bert Björkner

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations