Réaction allergique à la méthylprednisolone

Bikini textile contact dermatitis: A Sherlockian approach revealing 2.4-dichlorophenol as a potential textile contact allergen

BACKGROUND

Different textile constituents may act as allergens and/or irritants and provoke textile contact dermatitis (TCD).

OBJECTIVES

To report a case of TCD caused by ethylene glycol monododecyl ether and 2.4-dichlorophenol, present in a bikini.

METHODS

A woman presented with an eczematous, pruritic rash in the area of the bikini straps and back. Patch testing was performed with the European baseline, textile, sunscreen, and photo-patch series, the bikini "as is", and ethanol and acetone extracts of the bikini. Thin-layer chromatography (TLC) of the extracts and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) analysis were used to elucidate the culprit agents.

RESULTS

Positive reactions were found to the bikini "as is" and to the ethanol and acetone extracts. Patch testing with TLC strips showed a strong reaction to spots-fractions 3 and 4. GC-MS was performed to identify substances in each fraction and those suspected to be skin sensitisers were patch tested. On day (D) 4 positive reactions to ethylene glycol monododecyl ether (irritant reaction) and 2.4-dichlorophenol (++) were observed.

CONCLUSION

A myriad of chemical compounds can be found in clothing. Ethylene glycol monododecyl ether and 2.4-dichlorophenol were identified as the potential culprits of this bikini TCD.

HIGHLIGHTS

We have combined chemical analyses (thin-layer chromatography and gas chromatography-mass spectrometry) to study a case of textile contact dermatitis. As such, the presence of a myriad of chemical compounds was found in a bikini, suggesting that clothing in general may become impregnated or contaminated by a wide range of external substances that may be harmful to the skin. Textile contact dermatitis could in this case be attributed to ethylene glycol monododecyl ether (CAS No. 4536-30-5) and 2.4-dichlorophenol (CAS No. 120-83-2), the latter not yet previously described as a textile contact allergen.

Severe Cutaneous Adverse Reactions in Korean Pediatric Patients: A Study From the Korea SCAR Registry

PURPOSE

Although severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions (SCARs) are rare, they are associated with high morbidity and mortality, and thus early diagnosis and treatment are critical for improving prognoses. However, few studies have reported the characteristics of SCARs in children. Thus, we aimed to evaluate the clinical characteristics, current management and prognosis of pediatric SCARs.

METHODS

We analyzed pediatric data in the Korean SCARs registry, which was built retrospectively in 2016 with SCAR cases treated in 34 tertiary referral university hospitals during 2010-2015. Using these cases, we descriptively analyzed detailed data regarding etiology, clinical and laboratory features, treatment strategies, and prognosis.

RESULTS

Forty-seven pediatric SCAR cases from 15 tertiary referral hospitals were included. The median patient age was 10 (interquartile range, 3-15.5) years and 68.1% (n = 32) were males. The culprit drug was identified in 95.7% (n = 45) of the patients; antibiotics (44.7%) and antiepileptic drugs (19.1%) were the most common and second most common culprits, respectively. Drug Reaction with Eosinophilia and Systemic Symptoms (DRESS) cases presented with the largest area of skin involvement without permanent sequelae. Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) cases involved relatively small areas of skin but serious sequelae in two children. Of 4 patients with toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), 1 died. Of all patients assessed, 36 (76.6%) received systemic steroids and 21 (44.7%) received intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIG). Thirteen (27.7%) received both systemic steroids and IVIG. Cyclosporine was administered to only 1 patient along with a systemic steroid.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with pediatric SCARs, including those with DRESS, SJS and TEN, clinical presentations were variable. Thus, there was no clear continuous disease spectrum. Although the mortality rate was low (2.1%), clinical suspicion may be the best tool for proactive SCAR management.

Allergic hypersensitivity to topical and systemic corticosteroids: a review

Corticosteroids, which are potent anti-inflammatory and immunomodulator agents used in the treatment of various inflammatory diseases including allergic diseases, can in some cases produce immediate or delayed hypersensitivity reactions. This review summarizes the epidemiological and clinical characteristics of such reactions, including related diagnostic issues. It also presents a detailed analysis of the proposed immunological mechanisms including underlying cross-reactions.

Negative predictive value of drug skin tests in investigating cutaneous adverse drug reactions

BACKGROUND

Drug skin tests are useful in aetiological analyses of cutaneous adverse drug reactions to determine if the drug can be rechallenged, or to avoid a cross-reaction with a substitute drug.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the negative predictive value of drug skin tests.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed the files of patients referred for drug reactions. We have enrolled those having strictly determined drug reactions with clinical features, delayed onset after drug intake, drug causality assessment, and negative drug skin tests followed by drug administration. Oral provocation tests or substitution tests with a drug of the same class as that suspected of causing the drug reactions were performed.

RESULTS

From 1957 files analysed, 200 patients were included. After 403 patch tests, 403 prick tests and 304 intradermal tests, which were all negative, 260 oral provocation tests and 143 substitution tests were done; 307 different drugs were rechallenged. There were 42 positive drug re-administrations in 27 oral provocation tests and 15 substitution tests. The negative predictive value of our drug skin tests was 89.6%. The negative predictive value for beta-lactams was 87% for oral provocation tests and 96% for substitution tests, and for corticosteroids it was 100% and 74%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Negative drug skin tests do not eliminate the responsibility of a drug in drug reactions, and must be followed by drug re-administration under hospital surveillance.

[Immediate allergy to oral corticosteroids]

INTRODUCTION

Corticosteroids are widely used for the management of many diseases because of anti-inflammatory and immunomodulatory properties. Sulfite intolerance is well known but immediate hypersensitivity to corticosteroids is rarer and must be reported.

EXEGESIS

We report a case of a 38-year-old man, followed since 1986 for asthma with sulfite intolerance. He twice developed urticaria after ingesting betalactam antibiotics associated with corticosteroids of the group A, according to the Matura and Goossens's classification. The allergy inquiry confirmed not only a beta-lactame allergy but also in corticosteroids of the group A. Intradermal reactions with methylprednisolone and hydrocortisone were positive at 7 mm for methylprednisolone on 1/1000 dilution and at 4 mm for hydrocortisone on 1/10 dilution. Thus immediate allergy to corticosteroids was confirmed. But those skin tests were negative for corticosteroids of group B and C. In order to propose an alternative therapy for acute asthma, an intravenous injection of 4 mg of betamethasone was performed without inducing immediate and delayed allergic reactions.

CONCLUSION

Corticosteroid allergy is rare and can be fatal. Many asthmatic or acetylsalicylic acid intolerant patients may be concerned. The diagnostic of corticosteroid allergy have to be confirmed by clinical history and skin tests of the different groups to try to identify one or more allergens and to propose a alternative treatment if necessary.