A case of contact dermatitis syndrome caused by Dermabond®, followed by contact dermatitis caused by false eyelash glue and Aron Alpha® glue: possibility of cross-reactions among cyanoacrylates

Allergic contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors and insulin pumps: A full review: Part 1: Sensors and pumps, adverse cutaneous reactions, allergens, and diabetes devices causing allergic contact dermatitis

During the past 8 years, a large number of reports have appeared on allergic contact dermatitis to glucose sensors and insulin pumps in paediatric and adult patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Isobornyl acrylate in one particular sensor sensitised many hundreds of (published) individuals, and many other allergens were discovered in a large number of sensors and pumps. Diagnostic procedures with patch tests proved very complicated, as manufacturers showed a serious lack of cooperation with dermatologists in providing information on the ingredients of their products and samples for patch testing. This two-part article provides a full and detailed review of all aspects of the subject of allergic contact dermatitis to glucose sensors and insulin pumps. Part 1 begins with a general introduction to sensors and pumps, followed by the cutaneous adverse reactions that they have caused and a full account of the allergens in the diabetes devices. In addition, an overview of the glucose sensors and insulin pumps that have caused allergic contact dermatitis is presented. Part 2 presents all published case reports and case series, clinical features of allergic contact dermatitis to sensors and pumps, patch test procedures, differentiation from irritant dermatitis, management of allergic patients and (proposed) legislation.

Implications of Long-Term Double Eyelid Tape Use

BACKGROUNDS

The widespread adoption of double eyelid tapes (DET) to achieve the desired double eyelid aesthetic has prompted investigations into their long-term effects. Given the delicate and complex anatomy of the eyelid, concerns have emerged about the impact of DETs on eyelid structure and the outcomes of subsequent surgical procedures.

METHODS

A cohort of 267 outpatients from our department was recruited between January 2022 and January 2024 to participate in a survey assessing the usage of double eyelid tape (DET). Eyelid laxity was subsequently tested in all outpatients using the Vertical Lid Pull and Parallel Lid Pull methods. Among all participants, 33 underwent double eyelid surgery, with 22 having a history of excessive DET usage and 11 with no DET usage. Post-operative outcomes, including operation duration, satisfaction levels, and complications were recorded. Additionally excised eyelid skin tissues during surgery underwent Masson's staining and EVG staining to analyze collagen and elastic fibers.

RESULTS

Among surveyed outpatients (mean age: 23.79 ± 3.71 years, 99.63% female, mean BMI: 21.56 ± 1.75 kg/m2), 56.55% had oculopathy with ametropia being predominant (53.93%). Hooded eyelids were the most prevalent congenital condition (62.54%). Nearly half (49.44%) used Double Eyelid Tapes (DET) for 1-2 years, with 70.04% experiencing discomfort and 70.79% reporting permanent eyelid shape change. Lid pull measurements showed no significant difference in vertical pulls between DET users and non-users, but parallel pulls varied significantly (p<0.05). Complications like asymmetry, numbness, and hypertrophic scars were exclusive to DET users. Physician evaluations favored non-DET users significantly (p<0.05). Histological analysis revealed an interesting finding that individuals using DET have higher collagen levels and notable changes in skin structure when compared to non-users.

CONCLUSIONS

Prolonged use of double eyelid tape (DET) may result in eyelid laxity, impacting ocular health and complicating blepharoplasty procedures.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Octyl Cyanoacrylate Skin Glue After Surgical Wound Closure: A Systematic Review

The rising incidence of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) after cyanoacrylate adhesive use necessitates a comprehensive understanding of its clinical presentations, risk factors, and management. In this systematic review, we conducted an exhaustive search following PRISMA guidelines within Medline and PubMed databases to identify studies reporting cases of ACD resulting from cyanoacrylate adhesive application in wound closure. A total of 47 studies, covering 193 ACD cases, were included in our analysis. These cases involved 35 male, 120 female patients, and 38 cases without gender information (M:F ratio = 1:3.43), with ages ranging from 7 to 92 years (mean age 43.9 years). The majority of cases (n = 140) were part of 6 orthopedic studies, focusing on joint replacements (n = 68), orthopedic surgeries (n = 38), and breast surgeries (n = 29). The remaining 58 cases encompassed various surgical procedures. Common clinical manifestations included swelling, pruritic rash, erythema, vesicles, and itching around the surgical sites, typically appearing around 10 days post-adhesive application (within a range of 6 hours to 6 weeks). Patients with prior exposure to 2-octyl cyanoacrylate tended to exhibit earlier symptoms. Similar rates of dermatitis were observed across different adhesive brands, suggesting brand independence. Treatment strategies involved adhesive removal, administration of steroids and antihistamines, meticulous wound care, and, in some cases, surgical intervention. Notably, 3.1% of the 193 cases required surgical intervention. Risk factors, including a history of atopic dermatitis, high body mass index, diabetes, prior adhesive exposure, and surgical history, were identified in the studies. Patch tests confirmed 2-octyl cyanoacrylate as the allergen in 21 studies. Our review aims to enhance health care professionals' understanding of ACD resulting from the use of cyanoacrylate adhesive, facilitating improved postsurgical management and prevention strategies. Recognizing diverse risk factors, understanding varying clinical presentations, distinguishing ACD from infection, and employing appropriate treatment approaches are essential for achieving optimal outcomes in such cases.

Association of Surgical Adhesive and Glue System With Incidence of Allergic Dermatitis Post Unilateral and Staged Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty

Background Skin closure is an important step in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Several techniques are described in the literature with emerging interest in skin adhesives. This study aims to highlight the adverse reactions related to skin adhesives and to identify potential risk factors. Methods A retrospective review of 250 patients (295 knees, 45 being staged bilateral TKA) who underwent TKA was conducted at our facility. All patients underwent the same perioperative protocol with application of surgical glue over the wound edges. Postoperative adverse reactions were classified as allergic dermatitis (AD), cellulitis, and superficial infection. Results Incidence of adverse reactions in the form of AD was noted in 4.8% of patients. Demographics and comorbidities had no influence on this occurrence (p>0.05). However, in patients who had bilateral staged TKA, AD manifested after performing the second contralateral TKA in 22% of patients. This incidence of AD was significantly higher when compared to those who had single unilateral TKA (p =0.001) Conclusion The theory of allergic sensitization may explain the higher incidence of AD in bilateral staged TKA due to prior exposure to glue components in the first knee; thus, we recommend avoiding its use if there was previous exposure.

Allergic contact dermatitis caused by 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate and ethyl cyanoacrylate contained in cosmetic glues among hairdressers and beauticians who perform nail treatments and eyelash extension as well as hair extension applications: a systematic review

Current cosmetic regulations primarily focus on protecting consumers, not the professional user who is subjected to a partly different, and certainly more intense exposure to hazardous substances. Against this background, the present systematic review aims to compile and appraise evidence regarding skin toxicity of 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA; CAS no. 212-782-2) and ethyl cyanoacrylate (ECA; CAS no. 7085-85-0) contained in cosmetic glues used among hairdressers and beauticians who perform nail treatments and eyelash extension as well as hair extension applications. This systematic review followed the PRISMA 2020 recommendations for reporting systematic reviews and meta-analysis. In total, 6 publications from 6 countries were eligible for this systematic review. Meta-analysis revealed that hairdressers and beauticians have a 9-fold increased risk of developing contact allergy to HEMA compared to controls who are not hairdressers and beauticians. Results for ECA are lacking. The present systematic review clearly shows that - regarding contact allergy to acrylates - it is not appropriate to apply risk assessment for consumers to hairdressers and beauticians who occupationally handle cosmetic glues. The regulations in existence do not adequately address occupational risks for hairdressers and beauticians connected with the use of acrylate-containing cosmetic substances and need reconsideration. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Medical Adhesive Allergens: Retrospective Analysis of Cross-Sectional Data from the North American Contact Dermatitis Group, 2001-2018

BACKGROUND

Identification of allergens causing medical adhesive contact allergy is difficult.

OBJECTIVE

Characterize the demographics, clinical characteristics, patch test results and occupational data for North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) patients with medical adhesive contact allergy.

METHODS

Retrospective study of 43,722 NACDG patients patch-tested 2001-2018, with: 1) medical adhesive (tapes/band aids/adhesive aids/suture glue) source, 2) positive patch test, and 3) final primary diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis.

RESULTS

313 (0.7%) patients met inclusion criteria. Compared to other patients with final primary diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis, medical adhesive allergy patients were less likely male (odds ratio 0.58, 95% confidence interval [0.45-0.77]) and/or age >40 (0.76 [0.6-0.96]). The most common NACDG screening series allergens were colophony (80.7%), balsam of Peru (3.9%), 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2.7%) and carba mix (2.7%). One-fourth (79/313, 25.2%) had positive patch test reactions to supplemental allergens/materials, and 17.3% (54/313) only had reactions to supplemental allergens/materials.

LIMITATIONS

Results of comprehensive patch testing may be prone to referral population selection bias and may not be representative of the general dermatology population.

CONCLUSION

Colophony was the most common allergen. Supplemental allergens and materials should be tested in the evaluation of suspected medical adhesive contact allergy.

Complications and Adverse Effects of Periocular Aesthetic Treatments

The popularity and variety of temporary and permanent periocular aesthetic treatments has increased over the past decade. Patients frequently present to eye clinics with ocular complications and side effects following these treatments, their severity ranging from ocular irritation from dry eyes to visual loss from vascular occlusion. A careful, thorough history is essential, as many patients may not associate aesthetic procedures with ocular complications, and some may be embarrassed to disclose this information. All ophthalmologists should understand the potential ocular sequelae of these treatments and be able to initiate treatment in sight-threatening cases. Wesummarises the current literature on ophthalmic complications of the most common periocular aesthetic treatments.

Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Dermabond Prineo After Elective Orthopedic Surgery

The Dermabond Prineo skin closure system (Ethicon, Somerville, New Jersey) is a wound closure device that combines a 2-octyl cyanoacrylate liquid adhesive and a self-adhesive polyester mesh. Although cyanoacrylates traditionally have been associated with low rates of sensitization, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to Dermabond products is being increasingly reported after orthopedic surgery. The authors describe the first case series of ACD to Dermabond Prineo where patch testing confirmed the diagnosis in all patients. Six patients who had suspected Dermabond Prineo ACD after lower limb orthopedic surgery were assessed. Of these patients, 5 had itching within 4 days of surgery and rash within 5 days. All 5 of these patients reported previous exposure to Dermabond products. All patients had removal of the adhesive and mesh earlier than planned and were treated with corticosteroids. In addition, 4 patients received systemic antibiotics; however, only 1 had a microbiologically confirmed superficial skin infection. In all patients, the dermatitis resolved within 2 weeks of dressing removal, with no adverse effect on the orthopedic outcome. Patch testing showed positive reactions to Dermabond Prineo glue for all patients. Orthopedic surgeons should be aware of the potential for ACD to Dermabond Prineo, especially among patients with previous exposure to Dermabond products. The authors discuss the risk factors for ACD to Dermabond Prineo in the orthopedic cohort and provide recommendations for prevention and management. [Orthopedics. 2020;43(6):e515-e522.].

The use of non-surgical glue to repair perineal first-degree lacerations in normal birth: A non-inferiority randomised trial

BACKGROUND AND PROBLEM

Surgical glue has been indicated for uncomplicated operatory wounds; however, it has a considerable cost. Non-surgical glue, a commercially available and cheaper product, has not been studied for repairing postpartum lacerations.

AIM

To compare non-surgical glue to traditional sutures on perineal first-degree lacerations after normal birth.

METHODS

In a prospective, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial, we selected childbearing women who were admitted for normal term births and in whom skin lacerations occurred. They were assigned to laceration repair using either non-surgical glue (ethyl 2-cyanoacrylate; Glue group) or catgut sutures (Suture group). The primary endpoint was the occurrence of dehiscence >3mm. Secondary endpoints were procedure runtime, pain score, satisfaction level, and aspects of perineal repair by the REEDA score (hyperaemia, oedema, ecchymosis, exudation, and coaptation) immediately (T0), 24-48h (T1), and 7-10 days (T2) after childbirth.

FINDINGS

We included 126 women, 63 in each group, and found a non-inferiority dehiscence rate in the Glue Group compared to the Control group (T1=1.6% vs. 1.6%, P=0.999 and P<0.001 for non-inferiority; and T2=2.2% vs. 4.3%, P=0.557). In the Glue Group, the procedure runtime was shorter, pain score was lower, and women's satisfaction was greater. No women had any allergic reaction in the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-surgical glue was not inferior to traditional sutures to repair postpartum first-degree lacerations. In addition, non-surgical glue was associated with less pain and greater satisfaction. Brazilian Clinical Trials Registry (www.ensaiosclinicos.gov.br/rg/RBR-5Z8MKC).

Allergic contact dermatitis due to the liquid skin adhesive Dermabond® predominantly occurs after the first exposure

BACKGROUND

The clinical characteristics of patients with allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) due to a skin adhesive containing 2-octyl cyanoacrylate, Dermabond®, have not yet been elucidated.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the clinical characteristics of patients with ACD caused by Dermabond® application.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 577 patch tested patients were included. We identified patients with positive patch test results for Dermabond® and evaluated their results concerning (meth)acrylates and ethyl cyanoacrylate adhesive.

RESULTS

Nine patients had positive patch test results to Dermabond®; six had developed secondary generalization.The mean time between Dermabond® application and ACD onset was 34 days (range, 27-44) in six patients with ACD after the first use, whereas, in the other three patients, it was 5.6 days (range, 4-8) after the second use. The time was significantly different between the two groups (P < .01). Positive reactions to ethyl cyanoacrylate adhesive (Aron Alpha) occurred in seven of nine patients, to ethyl cyanoacrylate 10% pet. in four of eight patients tested, and to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate in one of eight patients tested.

CONCLUSIONS

Dermabond®-induced ACD is apparently characterized by a high prevalence of primary sensitization at first exposure to Dermabond®, secondary generalization is frequent, and most patients show cross-reactivity to ethyl cyanoacrylate.

Patch Testing Ingredients of Dermabond and Other Cyanoacrylate-Containing Adhesives

BACKGROUND

Cyanoacrylates are strong adhesives used for a variety of medical, industrial, and cosmetic applications and have been implicated as a cause of allergic contact dermatitis.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to review our experience in patch testing with cyanoacrylates.

METHODS

We reviewed patch test results of 38 patients with a clinical history of contact dermatitis due to a cyanoacrylate-containing adhesive (mostly Dermabond). Testing used cyanoacrylates of >99% purity diluted to 10% to 30% in petrolatum (pet.), undiluted octyl cyanoacrylate, and/or Dermabond Mini or Advanced "as is." Patch tests were also performed with methacrylates, formaldehyde (a cyanoacrylate impurity), benzalkonium chloride, and cyanoacrylate polymerization inhibitors. Three patients were also tested with Dermabond Mini on abraded skin.

RESULTS

Commercial cyanoacrylate patch testing material (ethyl cyanoacrylate 10% pet.) detected 29% of Dermabond-allergic patients, whereas patch testing with octyl cyanoacrylate 10% pet. increased detection to 50%. Testing with higher concentrations and/or on abraded skin further increased yield. Thirteen (37%) of our 35 cyanoacrylate-allergic patients were also allergic to methacrylates or acrylates.

CONCLUSIONS

Octyl cyanoacrylate is the usual allergenic ingredient in Dermabond. Patch testing with high concentrations is often required. Testing Dermabond on abraded skin further improves diagnostic sensitivity by more closely simulating clinical use.

Contact Allergy: A Review of Current Problems from a Clinical Perspective

Contact allergy is common, affecting 27% of the general population in Europe. Original publications, including case reports, published since 2016 (inclusive) were identified with the aim of collating a full review of current problems in the field. To this end, a literature search employing methods of systematic reviewing was performed in the Medline^® and Web of Science™ databases on 28 January 2018, using the search terms (“contact sensitization” or “contact allergy”). Of 446 non-duplicate publications identified by above search, 147 were excluded based on scrutiny of title, abstract and key words. Of the remaining 299 examined in full text, 291 were deemed appropriate for inclusion, and main findings were summarised in topic sections. In conclusion, diverse sources of exposures to chemicals of widely-differing types and structures, continue to induce sensitisation in man and may result in allergic contact dermatitis. Many of the chemicals are “evergreen” but others are “newcomers”. Vigilance and proper investigation (patch testing) are required to detect and inform of the presence of these haptens to which our populations remain exposed.