Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Ophthalmic Medications: Relevant Allergens and Alternative Testing Methods

Contact allergy to topical ophthalmic medications: A retrospective single-centre study of three decades

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of contact allergy to various ophthalmic medications appears to be rare; however, data on culprits, clinical relevance of sensitizations, and changes in frequency within recent decades are limited.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to investigate the clinical relevance, risk factors, and prevalence of contact allergy to topical ophthalmic medications in patients suspected of allergic contact dermatitis to ophthalmic medication.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed patch test results and clinical data for 754 patients patch-tested with an ophthalmic medication series at our tertiary referral centre between January 1992 and December 2022.

RESULTS

In total, 37.5% (283/754) of patch-tested patients had a contact allergy to at least one ophthalmic allergen, with 87.3% (247) being clinically relevant sensitization. Phenylephrine (31.8%, 192/604), povidone-iodine (29%, 27/93), and tobramycin (23%, 46/200) were the most important sensitizers. The incidence of contact allergies increased significantly in a linear manner (p = 0.008) from 20% to 44.1% within the study period. Male sex and age above 40 were risk factors for contact allergy to ophthalmic medication.

CONCLUSIONS

One third of patch tested patients had allergic contact dermatitis to ophthalmic medication, particularly phenylephrine. Male sex and age above 40 years were independent risk factors and drove the linear increase in contact allergy to ophthalmic medications within the past 31 years.

Contact allergy to SIDAPA baseline series allergens in patients with eyelid dermatitis: An Italian multicentre study

BACKGROUND

Eyelid dermatitis is a frequent reason of dermatological consultation. Its aetiology is not univocal, being contact dermatitis, both allergic and irritant, the most frequent. The primary sources of allergen exposure include cosmetics, metals, and topical medications, from direct, indirect, or airborne contact.

OBJECTIVES

To define the frequency of positive patch test reactions to SIDAPA baseline series allergens, to document positive allergens, and to precise the final diagnosis in patients with eyelid involvement.

METHODS

A total of 8557 consecutive patients from 12 Italian Dermatology Clinics underwent patch testing with SIDAPA baseline series in 2018 and 2019. Patients were divided into two groups: (i) with eyelid involvement with or without other involved sites (E-Group) and (ii) without eyelid involvement (NE-Group). The final diagnosis and the frequency of positive relevant patch test reactions were evaluated.

RESULTS

E-Group consisted of 688 patients (females 78.6%, mean age 45.3 years), 8.0% of 8557 consecutively patch-tested patients. The final diagnosis in E-Group was ADC in 42.4%, ICD in 34.2%, and AD in 30.5%. The highest reaction rates were elicited by nickel sulphate and methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone in both E-Group and NE-Group, even if these allergens were significantly more frequently positive in NE-Group patients than in E-Group ones. Positive patch test reactions to fragrance Mix II, dimethylaminopropylamine, and sorbitan sesquiolate were significantly more frequent in E-Group patients than in NE-Group ones.

CONCLUSIONS

Eyelid dermatitis is a frequent dermatological complaint. Allergic contact dermatitis is the most frequent diagnosis commonly caused by nickel sulphate, isothiazolinones, and fragrances. The surfactants dimethylaminopropylamine and sorbitan sesquioleate are emerging causes of eyelid allergic contact dermatitis.

Contact allergens responsible for eyelid dermatitis in adults

Allergic contact dermatitis has been established as the most frequent cause of eyelid dermatitis, but it is often misdiagnosed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the characteristics of patients with eyelid dermatitis who were referred for patch testing. The patients were divided into three subgroups in this retrospective study: patients with only eyelid involvement, patients with involvement of eyelids and other areas, and patients without eyelid involvement. Data was collected on diagnoses, medical history, personal care products and make-up use, occupational dermatitis, and positive allergens. An independent t-test, one-way ANOVA, and chi-squared test were used to analyze the data. A total of 427 patients who referred for patch tests were included in the study. Of these, 139 patients had eyelid dermatitis. Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) was the most common diagnosis in all three groups referred for patch tests. Use of shaving cream and hair conditioner was significantly higher in patients with only eyelid involvement and nickel sulfate was the most common allergen among them. Patch testing is the gold standard tool in the evaluation of eyelid contact dermatitis, and it is a necessity in the treatment of eyelid dermatitis, for the accurate identification of responsible allergens.

Ocular surface disease: a known yet overlooked side effect of topical glaucoma therapy

Ocular surface disease (OSD), a disorder affecting the lacrimal and meibomian glands and the corneal and conjunctival epithelium, is a well-known complication of topical glaucoma therapy. OSD can present as a new or pre-existing condition that virtually any anti-glaucoma formulation can exacerbate. As such, both glaucoma and OSD frequently coexist. Typical OSD symptoms include ocular discomfort, redness, burning, and dryness, whereas signs include periorbital and eyelid skin pigmentation, conjunctival scarring, and superficial punctate keratitis. Pressure-lowering eyedrops can cause toxic, allergic, and inflammatory reactions on the ocular surface. The latter can result from either preservatives or direct toxicity from the active molecule. Although usually mild, OSD can cause significant symptoms that lead to poor quality of life, decreased compliance to therapy, glaucoma progression, and worse visual outcomes. Given the chronic nature of glaucoma, lack of curative therapy, and subsequent lifelong treatment, addressing OSD is necessary. This manuscript aims to provide an up-to-date overview of OSD's signs, symptoms, and pathogenic mechanisms from glaucoma therapy toxicity.

Topical eye medications causing allergic contact dermatitis

BACKGROUND

Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) in the eye region caused by topical eye medications is difficult to diagnose and may be overlooked.

OBJECTIVE

To study the characteristics and causative agents in patients with ACD caused by topical eye medications in a Danish tertiary dermatology department.

METHODS

A retrospective study of 318 patients, patch tested between 2013 and 2021 due to suspected ACD to topical eye medications. All patients were tested with a locally developed eye medication series, some were additionally tested with suspected eye medications. Medical records were studied in patch test positive patients.

RESULTS

Contact allergy to a topical eye allergen/medication was found in 12.9% (n = 41) of 318 patients, and culprit allergens were phenylephrine (6.9%), timolol (2.5%) and ketotifen (1.6%). Patch test positive patients were often previously diagnosed with cataract (29.3%) or glaucoma (24.4%), and the majority reported more than one previous reaction. Initial symptoms were oedema (56.0%), erythema (48.8%) and dermatitis (31.7%) in the eye region, and facial dermatitis was also seen.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with symptoms from the eye region who have been using topical eye medications should be patch tested with ingredients from commonly used eye medications supplemented by the products tested 'as is'.

A closer look at allergic contact dermatitis caused by topical ophthalmic medications

BACKGROUND

Allergic contact dermatitis caused by topical ophthalmic medications (OftACD) is frequently difficult to confirm with patch testing and, therefore, it is considered uncommon.

METHODS

We collected retrospective data from a cohort of 65 patients with suspected OftACD patch tested in our Dermatology Unit (2005-2021) according to ESCD guidelines, using a series of topical drugs and excipients (Chemotechnique Diagnostics), including betaxolol and timolol 5% pet. kindly supplied by the pharmaceutical industry. Also, frequently used ophthalmic medications as well as patient's own products were also patch tested 'as is' in most patients.

RESULTS

Positive patch tests to ophthalmic medications occurred in 44 patients (67.7%) (38F/6M; mean age 63.1 years), with 102 positive reactions. Most positive reactions were associated with active ingredients (n = 56), especially aminoglycoside antibiotics (n = 27), followed by excipients (n = 24) such as sodium metabisulfite (n = 7). There were also positive reactions to topical products tested 'as is' (n = 22), mostly containing beta-blockers, but only five of these reacted to the active ingredient.

DISCUSSION

This study reinforces previous findings in OftACD, such as older age of onset, and the importance of antibiotics, contrasting with the progressively lower prevalence of excipients. In addition, it helps raising awareness for the sensitization to beta-blockers, which is probably underestimated. Patch test preparations for the diagnosis of OftACD may require protocol optimization.

The Benefit Of Scratch Patch Testing To Demonstrate Ocular Contact Allergy To Brimonidine Tartrate

INTRODUCTION

Ocular allergies to brimonidine are frequent in patients treated for glaucoma. There is variability in reporting due to the lack of diagnostic criteria and absence of cutaneous testing. Many false negative patch tests (PT) have been described. Alternative methods, such as strip and scratch PT, have been used without a standardized method.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective is to identify the best method of cutaneous testing and brimonidine concentration for patch testing. The secondary objective is to identify clinical signs and symptoms suggestive of ocular allergy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective review of patient files suspected of brimonidine ocular allergy was performed. Patch testing method, brimonidine concentration and clinical symptoms were reviewed.

RESULTS

Of the 36 patients identified, half tested positive to brimonidine for at least one of the testing methods. The scratch PT demonstrated 17 positive reactions (94% detection rate). 3 patients reacted with strip PT. No positive results were found with standard PT. The 5% brimonidine concentration demonstrated the highest sensitivity. Absence of eyelid pruritus was associated with negative testing.

CONCLUSION

In the investigation of ocular allergy to brimonidine, scratch PT proved to be an essential tool. Brimonidine 5% pet. appeared as the most sensitive concentration for scratch PT.

What is the optimal duration for a ROAT? The experience of the French Dermatology and Allergology Group (DAG)

The repeated open application test (ROAT) is an adjuvant investigation measure to patch testing in the diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis. ESCD recommends a 15 days duration but its overall duration varies according to publications and patients hardly adhere to prolonged ROAT duration beyond one week .

MATERIEL AND METHOD

The Dermatology and Allergy Group of the French Society of Dermatology performed a prospective study with the aim of determining the best duration for the ROAT.

RESULTS

A total of 328 ROAT results were collected for topical products, including cosmetics (60%) and topical medications (31.1%). Fifty-nine (18%) ROATs were positive, and 16 (5%) were doubtful. All the positive ROATs occurred within 10 days, with a median time to positivity of 3 days.

CONCLUSION

According to our results, a minimum duration of 10 days is necessary to achieve a positive ROAT to a topical product. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Dermatological adverse effects of anti-glaucoma eye drops: a review

Many patients are treated for glaucoma. Like other drugs, anti-glaucoma eye drops may induce dermatological adverse effects. We aim to review the dermatological adverse effects secondary to the active agents in anti-glaucoma eye drops through a literature review. In January 2020, we queried PubMed using the following MeSH terms: glaucoma/drug therapy or glaucoma, open angle/drug therapy cross-referenced with parasympathomimetics/adverse effects or adrenergic agonists/adverse effects or carbonic anhydrase inhibitors/adverse effects or prostaglandins F, synthetic/adverse effects or adrenergic beta antagonists/adverse effects or ophthalmic solutions/adverse effects. The initial search identified 1128 studies, of which 49 were excluded for being in a foreign language, 15 for not involving eye drops, 968 for not focusing on adverse dermatological effects, and 11 for insufficient documentation or redundancy. After adding 38 linked studies, we finally analysed 123 studies. The ocular and periocular dermatological adverse effects of eye drops are contact dermatitis, hyperpigmentation, prostaglandin analogue periorbitopathy, mucous membrane pemphigoid, eyelash depigmentation, skin hypertrichosis, and rare cases of melanoma and skin depigmentation. The reported distant dermatological adverse effects are psoriasis, excessive sweating, lichen planus, alopecia, toxic epidermal necrolysis, erythema multiforme, erythroderma, subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus, nail pigmentation and bullous pemphigoid. Most of the cutaneous adverse effects of anti-glaucoma eye drops are ocular and periocular and induced by prostaglandin analogues. Distant adverse effects are rare and sometimes questionable but should be kept in mind, especially mucous membrane pemphigoid, which could lead to blindness. The role of preservatives, such as benzalkonium chloride, should also be considered.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis From Topical Drugs: An Overview

ABSTRACT

Allergic contact dermatitis from topical drugs is frequent and is seen in 10% to 17% of patients patch tested for suspected contact dermatitis. More than 360 drugs have been implicated as contact allergens, of which-generally-antibiotics, corticosteroids, local anesthetics, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are the most frequent culprits. This article provides an overview of allergic contact dermatitis to topical drugs, discussing their prevalence of sensitization, predisposing factors, clinical manifestations (both typical and atypical), the drugs described as allergens, cross-reactivity and coreactivity, and diagnostic procedures.

Contact Allergens in Prescription Topical Ophthalmic Medications

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE

Both active and inactive ingredients in topical ophthalmic agents may cause allergic contact dermatitis. Here, we examined ingredients in prescription topical ophthalmic medications available in the United States.

METHODS

A comprehensive list of topical ophthalmic medications was generated using AccessPharmacy. Categories included antiglaucoma, antibiotic, antibiotic/corticosteroid, corticosteroid, antiviral, antifungal, mydriatic, and miotic agents. For each formulation, ingredients were investigated using the National Institutes of Health US National Library of Medicine database and/or manufacturer websites. Counts and proportions were calculated for inactive ingredients, including those in the American Contact Dermatitis Society (ACDS) Core 90 Allergen Series.

RESULTS

Two hundred sixty-four unique prescription ophthalmic medications met the inclusion criteria. The most common ACDS Core 90 allergen/cross-reactor inactive ingredient was benzalkonium chloride (68.1%, 180/264), followed by sorbates (11.7%, 31/264), parabens (6.8%, 18/264), sodium metabisulfite (3.8%, 10/264), propylene glycol (3.0%, 8/264), and lanolin (3.0%, 8/264). Approximately 21% (20.8%, 55/264) of products had no ACDS Core 90 allergens/cross-reactor inactive ingredients. The most common ACDS Core 90 allergen/cross-reactor active ingredients were aminoglycoside antibiotics, bacitracin/polymyxin B, and corticosteroids. Important non-ACDS Core 90 allergens included inactive ingredients, such as EDTA 28.0% and thimerosal 2.7%, as well as active ingredients, especially β-blockers.

CONCLUSIONS

Benzalkonium chloride, sodium metabisulfite, propylene glycol, and lanolin were common inactive ingredient allergens. Most ophthalmic categories had low allergen formulations available for patients with contact allergy.

Environmental Causes of Dermatitis

Environmental, or exogenous, dermatitis is comprised of irritant and allergic contact dermatitis, which account for 80% and 20% of cases of contact dermatitis, respectively. Contact dermatitis is extremely common, and failure to diagnose this entity may result in overlooking a potentially curable driver of disease. In this review, we describe how clinical features, such as morphology or history, can assist in distinguishing exogenous from endogenous causes of dermatitis, and allergic from irritant contact dermatitis. Additionally, we provide an overview of common contact allergens and how dermatitis distribution can suggest possible culprit allergens. Patch testing is needed to confirm contact allergy.

Punctal Congestion Syndrome: A Reversible, Functional Punctal Stenosis Causing Epiphora in the Setting of Chronic Pretarsal Conjunctivitis

PURPOSE

To describe a reversible syndrome of epiphora, functional punctal stenosis, and chronic pretarsal conjunctivitis associated with corticosteroid or corticosteroid-antibiotic eyedrop use.

METHODS

This is an Institutional Review Board-approved retrospective review of patients diagnosed with epiphora, punctal stenosis, and chronic conjunctivitis by a single surgeon (B.J.W.). These patients were subsequently invited to participate in a prospective study involving allergy skin patch testing for ophthalmic drops, common excipients, and active ingredients.

RESULTS

Thirteen patients received a diagnosis of punctal congestion syndrome. The average age was 63 years (range, 41-93) and 69.2% were female. Findings were bilateral in 61.5%. All had used preserved drops in the affected eye(s). Various antecedent diagnoses resulted in treatment with preserved drops. Patients experienced epiphora for an average of 3.8 months (median, 3 months; mode, 3 months; range, 1-8 months) prior to presentation. Two patients had undergone punctoplasty which failed to resolve symptoms. 92.3% of patients had been taking tobramycin-dexamethasone drops, loteprednol drops, or a combination of both prior to presentation. All were taken off preserved drops. 69.2% were also treated with a preservative-free loteprednol etabonate 0.5% ophthalmic ointment taper. All improved. Partial relief of symptoms was achieved by an average of 1.6 months (median, 2 months; mode, 2 months; standard deviation, ±0.7 months) and resolution of symptoms by 2.5 months (median, 2 months; mode, 2 months; standard deviation, ±1.7 months). One patient underwent patch testing with strong positive reactions to formaldehyde and neomycin and a weak positive reaction to gentamicin.

CONCLUSIONS

Functional punctal stenosis is associated with topical ophthalmic preparations, especially preserved corticosteroids and antibiotic-corticosteroid combinations. Treatment consists of removal of all preserved eyedrops. Symptoms often improve over several months.

Seven Common Allergen Groups Causing Eyelid Dermatitis: Education and Avoidance Strategies

Objective

Eyelid dermatitis is most commonly attributed to allergic response. This retrospective clinical study identifies common allergens with eyelid involvement and addresses a literary gap by providing a clear approach for effective management of periorbital allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) recurrence.

Methods

Charts of 215 patients diagnosed with periorbital dermatitis who were patch tested with Mayo Clinic Standard Series, Extended Standard Series, and personal products from 2013 to 2017 were examined. Positive reaction rates for patients with eyelid involvement were compared to those without. Findings were also compared to North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) 2013–2014 and Mayo Clinic Contact Dermatitis Group (MCCDG) 2011–2015 general patch test populations.

Results

The 215 patients showed more common allergy to shellac, benzalkonium chloride, acrylates, and surfactants than the NACDG and MCCDG study populations. Periorbital ACD allergen groups eliciting the highest positive reaction rates were, in descending order: metals, shellac, preservatives, topical antibiotics, fragrances, acrylates, and surfactants. Of the corticosteroids, only tixocortol pivalate (the screening agent for prednisolone and fluorometholone) and budesonide elicited positive reactions.

Conclusion

The top seven eyelid ACD allergen groups were identified. Avoidance of these allergens can be straightforward, with initial empiric counseling and free, online allergen avoidance programs. Patients who are unresponsive to avoidance should undergo patch testing.

Eyelid dermatitis in patients referred for patch testing: Retrospective analysis of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data, 1994-2016

BACKGROUND

Eyelid dermatitis is a common dermatologic complaint.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize patients with eyelid dermatitis.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis (1994-2016) of North American Contact Dermatitis Group data.

RESULTS

Of 50,795 patients, 2332 (4.6%) had eyelid dermatitis only, whereas 1623 (3.2%) also had dermatitis of the eyelids and head or neck. Compared with patients without eyelid involvement (n = 26,130), groups with eyelid dermatitis only and dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck were significantly more likely to be female, white, and older than 40 years, and to have a history of hay fever, atopic dermatitis, or both (P < .01). Final primary diagnoses included allergic contact dermatitis (eyelid dermatitis only: 43.4%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 53.5%), irritant contact dermatitis (eyelid dermatitis only: 17.0%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 9.8%), and atopic dermatitis (eyelid dermatitis only: 13.1%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 13.8%). Top 5 currently relevant allergens included nickel sulfate (eyelid dermatitis only: 18.6%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 22.5%), fragrance mix I (eyelid dermatitis only: 16.5%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 18.3%), methylisothiazolinone (eyelid dermatitis only: 16.5%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 17.7%), gold sodium thiosulfate (eyelid dermatitis only: 14.7%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 11.4%), and balsam of Peru (eyelid dermatitis only: 11.9%; dermatitis of the eyelid and head or neck: 12.6%). Both eyelid-involvement groups were significantly more likely to react to gold sodium thiosulfate, carmine, shellac, dimethylaminopropylamine, oleamidopropyl dimethylamine, and thimerosal (P < .05) compared with the no eyelid involvement group.

LIMITATIONS

Lack of specific distribution patterns of eyelid dermatitis and no long-term follow-up data.

CONCLUSION

Patch testing remains a critical tool in evaluating patients with eyelid dermatitis.

Long-term Side Effects Including Blepharitis Leading to Discontinuation of Ripasudil

PRECIS

Blepharitis was the most common side effect leading to discontinuation of ripasudil therapy. Prior allergic reactions to other topical glaucoma were found to be a risk factor for ripasudil-induced blepharitis.

PURPOSE

To report the incidence proportion of blepharitis and its relating factors due to long-term use of 0.4% riapasudil, a Rho-kinase inhibitor, in glaucoma patients of a clinical setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

One hundred three eyes of 103 consecutive glaucoma patients who started ripasudil treatment between December 2014 and February 2017 at our institute, and who had a follow-up period of over 6 months were enrolled in this study. Incidence proportion, time required for recovery and risk factors associated with blepharitis and other side effects that led to discontinuation of ripasudil treatment were considered.

RESULTS

The most frequently observed side effect was blepharitis (25.2%). The 12- and 24-month discontinuation rate due to blepharitis was 21.1%±8.2% and 34.6%±11.8% (average±SE), respectively (Kaplan-Meier analysis). Most patients recovered from blepharitis symptoms within 4 weeks, but 5 patients required over 8 weeks for recovery. Past history of allergic reactions to other topical glaucoma medication was significantly correlated with the manifestation of blepharitis (Cox proportional hazard model, P<0.007) while age, sex, intraocular pressure reduction rate, number of administered eye drops, history of systemic allergic diseases were not.

CONCLUSIONS

Blepharitis was the most common reason for discontinuation of ripasudil treatment. Although most cases were resolved spontaneously, prolonged blepharitis was observed in a few patients. A past history of allergic reaction to other glaucoma medication indicates a higher possibility of blepharitis with ripasudil use and warrants careful administration.

Periocular contact dermatitis with use of topical voriconazole 1% in mycotic keratitis

We present two cases of culture-proven fungal keratitis on natamycin treatment which developed periocular erythema, oedema, burning sensation and pruritus within 48 hours of the addition of topical voriconazole. On clinical examination, periocular erythema with induration was noted. A diagnosis of orbital cellulitis was suspected, but the absence of pain and tenderness refuted the diagnosis on clinical grounds. A dermatology consultation was sought, and a diagnosis of periocular contact dermatitis with voriconazole was made. A skin patch test was performed with the same medication; however, it was negative. Topical voriconazole therapy was withdrawn, and the patient was prescribed cold compresses and oral antihistamine medication, to which they responded well.