Pitfalls in patch testing

References

• Dupuis G, Benezra C. Allergic Contact Dermatitis To Simple Chemicals: A Molecular Approach. Marcel Dekker, NY, USA (1982).
   Google Scholar
• Freudenberg MA, Esser PR, Jakob T, Galanos C, Martin SF. Innate and adaptive immune responses in contact dermatitis: analogy with infections. G. Ital. Dermatol. Venereol.144, 173–185 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• TRUE Test Study Group. Comparative studies with TRUE test and Finn chamber in eight Swedish hospitals. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.21, 486–489 (1989).
   Google Scholar
• Menné T, White I. Standardization in contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis58, 321 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Groot AC. Patch Testing: Test Concentrations And Vehicles For 3700 Chemicals. 2nd Edition. Elsevier, Amsterdam, The Netherlands (1994).
   Google Scholar
• Motolese A, Seidenari S. Patch test reading: a comparison between 2 application methods. Contact Dermatitis30, 49–50 (2006).
   Google Scholar
• Pryzbilla B, Burg G, Thieme C. Evaluation of the immune status in vivo by the 2,4-dinitro-1-chlorobenzene contact allergy time. Dermatologica167, 1–5 (1983).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Elston D, Licata A, Rudner E, Trotter K. Pitfalls in patch testing. Am. J. Contact Dermat.11, 184–188 (2000).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Belsito DV. The diagnostic evaluation, treatment, and prevention of allergic contact dermatitis in the new millennium. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol.105, 409–420 (2000).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitchell JC. Multiple concomitant positive patch test reactions. Contact Dermatitis3, 315–320 (1977).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flori ML, Andreassi L. Patch tests after cyclosporine. A treatment in hyperreactive patients. Contact Dermatitis31, 325–326 (1994).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Fyad A, Masmoudi ML, Lachapelle JM. The ‘edge effect’ with patch test materials. Contact Dermatitis16, 147–151 (1987).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bajanason B, Flosadottir E, Fischer T. Reactivity at the edges of corticosteroid patch test may be an indicator of a strong positive test response. Dermatology199, 130–134 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Uehara M, Takahashi C, Ofuji S. Pustular patch test reactions in atopic dermatitis. Arch. Dermatol.111, 1154–1157 (1975).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Geier J, Gefeller O, Wiechmann K, Fuchs T. Patch test rections at D4, D5 and D6. Contact Dermatitis40, 119–126 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Nino M, Patruno C, Zagaria O, Balato N. Allergic contact dermatitis from heparin-containing gel: use of scratch patch test for diagnosis. Dermatitis20, 171–172 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher AA. The evolution of the terminology ‘crazy’ or ‘angry’ back syndrome in patch test procedures. Cutis58, 389–390 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lachapelle JM, Maibach HI. Patch Testing And Prick Testing. A Practical Guide. 2nd Edition. Springer, Berlin, Germany, 195 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Hepewald J, Utar W, Kränke B, Schnuch A, Gefeller O, Pfahlberg A. Patch test results with metals and metereological conditions. Int. Arch. Allergy Immunol.147, 235–240 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Militello G, Jacob SE, Crawford GH. Allergic contact dermatitis in children. Curr. Opin. Pediatr.18, 385–390 (2006).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mailhol C, Lawers-Cnces V, Rancé F, Paul C, Giordano-Labadie F. Prevalence and risk factors for allergic contact dermatitis to topical treatment in atopic dermatitis: a study in 641 children. Allergy64, 801–806 (2009).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ayala F, Lembo G, Patruno C, Balato N. Shoe contact dermatitis in children. Boll. Dermatol. Allergol. Prof.2, 242–245 (1987).
   Google Scholar
• Korting HC, Parsch EM, Enders F et al. Allergic contact dermatitis to cocoamidopropyl betaine in shampoo. J. Am. Acad. Dermatol.27, 1013–1015 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giusti F, Massone F, Bertoni L et al. Contact sensitization to disperse dyes in children. Pediatr. Dermatol.20, 393–397 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnke H, Norberg LA, Vach W et al. Reactivity to patch tests with nickel sulphate and fragrance mix in infants Contact Dermatitis51, 141–147 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jacob SE, Steele T, Brod B, Crawford GH. Dispelling the myths behind pediatric patch testing. Experience from our tertiary care patch testing centers. Pediatr. Dermatol.25, 296–300 (2008).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balato N, Lembo G, Patruno C, Ayala F. Patch testing in children. Contact Dermatitis20, 305–307 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lachapelle JM, Douka MA. An evaluation of the compatibility between aluminium Finn Chambers and various mercurials dissolved in water or dispersed in petrolatum. Derm. Beruf Umwelt33, 12–14 (1985).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hannuksela M. Epicutaneous testing. Allergy34, 5–10 (1979).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lachapelle JM, Maibach HI. Patch Testing And Prick Testing. A Practical Guide. 2nd Edition. Springer, Berlin, Germany, 44 (2009).
   Google Scholar
• Jadasshon J. Zur kenntnis der medikamentössen dermatosen. In: Verhandlungen Der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft, V Kongress. Jarish A, Neisser A, (Eds). Julus Springer, Berlin, Germany, 103–129 (1895).
   Google Scholar
• Seidenari S, Belletti B. The quantification of patch test responses: a comparison between ecographyc and colorimetric methods. Acta Derm. Venereol.78, 364–366 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Interagency Coordinating Committee on the Validation of Alternative Methods (ICCVAM) and the National Toxicology Program Center for the Evaluation of Alternative Toxicological Methods (NICEATM), National Toxicology Program. The Murine Local Lymph Node Assay: A Test Method For Assessing The Allergic Contact Dermatitis Potential Of Chemicals/Compounds. The Committee, Research Triangle Park, NC, USA; NIH Publication 99–4494 (1999).
   Google Scholar