Advertisement

Patch Testing Essentials

  • Cecilia SvedmanEmail author
  • Bruze Magnus
Chapter

Abstract

In patch testing, a standardized manner of testing and of patch test reading is essential. In this chapter, the basic aspects of these issues are discussed, as well as thoughts on when patch testing should be probably, with what to patch test, especially considering the baseline series, and pitfalls when patch test reading.

Keywords

Contact allergen Patch test reading Patch testing Patch test chamber Reading time Occlusion time Reading scale Standardization Stability of allergens 

References

  1. 1.
    Lönngren V, Young E, Simanaitis M, Svedman C. Neutrophilic and eosinophilic dermatitis caused by contact allergic reaction to paraphenylenediamine in hair dye. Arch Dermatol. 2012;148(11):1299–301.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mann J, McFadden JP, White JM, et al. Baseline series fragrance markers fail to predict contact allergy. Contact Dermatitis. 2014;70:276–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Nardelli A, Carbonez A, Drieghe J, Goossens A. Results of patch testing with fragrance mix 1, fragrance mix 2, and their ingredients, and Myroxylon pereirae and colophonium, over a 21-year period. Contact Dermatitis. 2013;68:307–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bruze M, Engfeldt M, Gonçalo M, Goossens A. Recommendation to include methylisothiazolinone in the European baseline patch test series – on behalf of the European Society of Contact Dermatitis and the European Environmental and Contact Dermatitis Research Group. Contact Dermatitis. 2013;69:263–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pontén A, Goossens A, Bruze M. Recommendation to include formaldehyde 2.0% aqua in the European baseline patch test series. Contact Dermatitis. 2013;69:372–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bruze M, Condé-Salazar L, Goossens A, Kanerva L, White IR. Thoughts on sensitizers in a standard patch test series. The European Society of Contact Dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1999;41:241–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wee JS, White JM, McFadden JP, et al. Patch testing in patients treated with systemic immunosuppression and cytokine inhibitors. Contact Dermatitis. 2010;62:165–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Frick M, Zimerson E, Karlsson D, et al. Poor correlation between stated and found concentrations of diphenylmethane-4,4′-diisocyanate (4,4′-MDI) in petrolatum patch-test preparations. Contact Dermatitis. 2004;51:73–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ryberg K, Gruvberger B, Zimerson E, et al. Chemical investigations of disperse dyes in patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis. 2008;58:199–209.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mose KF, Andersen KE, Christensen LP. Stability of selected volatile contact allergens in different patch test chambers under different storage conditions. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;66:172–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mowitz M, Zimerson E, Svedman C, et al. Stability of fragrance patch test preparations applied in test chambers. Br J Dermatol. 2012;167:822–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Siemund I, Zimerson E, Hindsén M, et al. Establishing aluminium contact allergy. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;67:162–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bruze M, Björkner B, Lepoittevin JP. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from ethyl cyanoacrylate. Contact Dermatitis. 1995;32:156–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hauksson I, Pontén A, Gruvberger B, et al. Clinically relevant contact allergy to formaldehyde may be missed by testing with formaldehyde 1.0%. Br J Dermatol. 2011;164:568–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bruze M, Frick-Engfeldt M, Gruvberger B, et al. Variation in the amount of petrolatum preparation applied at patch testing. Contact Dermatitis. 2007;56:38–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fregert S. Manual of contact dermatitis. 2nd ed. Copenhagen: Munksgaard; 1981.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ale SI, Maibach HI. 24-hour versus 48-hour occlusion in patch testing. Exog Dermatol. 2003;2:270–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Isaksson M, Bruze M, Goossens A, et al. Patch testing with budesonide in serial dilutions: the significance of dose, occlusion time and reading time. Contact Dermatitis. 1999;40:24–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brasch J, Geier J, Henseler T. Evaluation of patch test results by use of the reaction index. An analysis of data recorded by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK). Contact Dermatitis. 1995;33:375–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Jonker MJ, Bruynzeel DP. The outcome of an additional patch-test reading on day 6 or 7. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;42:330–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Aw M, Curley R, Graham M, et al. Delayed patch test reactions at days 7 and 9. Contact Dermatitis. 1989;20:127–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Higgins E, Collins P. The relevance of 7-day patch test reading. Dermatitis. 2013;24:237–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mathias CGT, Maibach HI. When to patch test read? Int J Dermatol. 1979;18:127–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Wilkinson DS, Fregert S, Magnusson B, et al. Terminology of contact dermatitis. Acta Derm Venereol. 1970;50:287–92.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Svedman C, Isaksson M, Björk J, et al. ‘Calibration’ of our patch test reading technique is necessary. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;66:180–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bruze M, Isaksson M, Svedman C. A modified reading scale for patch test reactions. In manuscript.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Occupational and Environmental DermatologySkane University Hospital, University of LundMalmöSweden

Personalised recommendations