Clinical features and diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis
- James Yiannias, MD
James Yiannias, MD
- Associate Professor
- Mayo Clinic College of Medicine
Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is the classic presentation of a T-cell-mediated, delayed-type hypersensitivity response to exogenous agents [1,2]. The words "dermatitis" and "eczema" are often used interchangeably to describe a pattern of inflammation of the skin characterized acutely by erythema, vesiculation, and pruritus. Chronic exposure typically leads to moderation of the erythema accompanied by lichenification and persistence of itch. The clinical presentation may vary depending upon the triggering agent and individual's reactivity, but, in most cases, the lesions are primarily confined to the site of contact [3,4].
This topic will discuss the clinical presentation, diagnosis, and differential diagnosis of ACD. The pathophysiology, patch testing for, and management of ACD are discussed separately. (See "Basic mechanisms and pathophysiology of allergic contact dermatitis" and "Patch testing" and "Management of allergic contact dermatitis".)
EPIDEMIOLOGY AND RISK FACTORS
The incidence and prevalence of ACD in the general population are not known. Data are often extrapolated from surveillance studies on occupational dermatitis. In industrialized nations, up to 30 percent of all occupational diseases involve the skin. Irritant and contact dermatitis account for more than 90 percent of cases .
Surveillance studies have reported an annual incidence of contact dermatitis (including irritant and ACD) of 13 to 34 cases per 100,000 workers [6-8]. The agents most frequently implicated included latex materials, protective equipment, soap and cleansers, resins, and acrylics. Information on the main allergens responsible for contact dermatitis in the general population is derived from retrospective studies of patch testing referral centers. In one study, metals, fragrances, topical antibiotics, preservatives, chemicals used in hair care products, topical corticosteroids, glues, plastics, and rubber were the most common allergen groups associated with positive patch test reaction . Among children, nickel sulfate, ammonium persulfate, gold sodium thiosulfate, thimerosal, and toluene-2,5-diamine (p-toluenediamine) are the most common sensitizers . (See "Common allergens in allergic contact dermatitis".)
Multiple studies from around the world indicate that, of patients presenting for patch testing, 20 to up to 40 percent will be allergic to nickel [11-16]. In North America, the most common cause of ACD is from contact with poison ivy, oak, and sumac. (See "Poison ivy (Toxicodendron) dermatitis".)
- Pathogenesis of Allergic Contact Hypersensitivity. In: Fisher's Contact Dermatitis, 6th ed, Rietschel RL, Fowler JF Jr (Eds), BC Decker Inc, Hamilton, ON 2008. p.1.
- Mowad CM, Anderson B, Scheinman P, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis: Patient diagnosis and evaluation. J Am Acad Dermatol 2016; 74:1029.
- Krasteva M, Kehren J, Sayag M, et al. Contact dermatitis II. Clinical aspects and diagnosis. Eur J Dermatol 1999; 9:144.
- Rashid RS, Shim TN. Contact dermatitis. BMJ 2016; 353:i3299.
- Clark SC, Zirwas MJ. Management of occupational dermatitis. Dermatol Clin 2009; 27:365.
- Meyer JD, Chen Y, Holt DL, et al. Occupational contact dermatitis in the UK: a surveillance report from EPIDERM and OPRA. Occup Med (Lond) 2000; 50:265.
- Turner S, Carder M, van Tongeren M, et al. The incidence of occupational skin disease as reported to The Health and Occupation Reporting (THOR) network between 2002 and 2005. Br J Dermatol 2007; 157:713.
- http://www.bls.gov/news.release/archives/osh_10212010.pdf (Accessed on August 22, 2011).
- Wentworth AB, Yiannias JA, Keeling JH, et al. Trends in patch-test results and allergen changes in the standard series: a Mayo Clinic 5-year retrospective review (January 1, 2006, to December 31, 2010). J Am Acad Dermatol 2014; 70:269.
- Bonitsis NG, Tatsioni A, Bassioukas K, Ioannidis JP. Allergens responsible for allergic contact dermatitis among children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Contact Dermatitis 2011; 64:245.
- Aguilar-Bernier M, Bernal-Ruiz AI, Rivas-Ruiz F, et al. [Contact sensitization to allergens in the Spanish standard series at Hospital Costa del Sol in Marbella, Spain: a retrospective study (2005-2010)]. Actas Dermosifiliogr 2012; 103:223.
- Zug KA, Warshaw EM, Fowler JF Jr, et al. Patch-test results of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group 2005-2006. Dermatitis 2009; 20:149.
- Nonaka H, Nakada T, Iijima M, Maibach HI. Metal patch test results from 1990-2009. J Dermatol 2011; 38:267.
- Yin R, Huang XY, Zhou XF, Hao F. A retrospective study of patch tests in Chongqing, China from 2004 to 2009. Contact Dermatitis 2011; 65:28.
- Carøe C, Andersen KE, Mortz CG. Fluctuations in the prevalence of nickel and cobalt allergy in eczema patients patch tested after implementation of the nickel regulation in Denmark. Contact Dermatitis 2011; 64:126.
- Uter W, Rämsch C, Aberer W, et al. The European baseline series in 10 European Countries, 2005/2006--results of the European Surveillance System on Contact Allergies (ESSCA). Contact Dermatitis 2009; 61:31.
- Sharma VK, Asati DP. Pediatric contact dermatitis. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2010; 76:514.
- Simonsen AB, Deleuran M, Johansen JD, Sommerlund M. Contact allergy and allergic contact dermatitis in children - a review of current data. Contact Dermatitis 2011; 65:254.
- Prakash AV, Davis MD. Contact dermatitis in older adults: a review of the literature. Am J Clin Dermatol 2010; 11:373.
- de Groot AC. The frequency of contact allergy in atopic patients with dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 1990; 22:273.
- Giordano-Labadie F, Rancé F, Pellegrin F, et al. Frequency of contact allergy in children with atopic dermatitis: results of a prospective study of 137 cases. Contact Dermatitis 1999; 40:192.
- Czarnobilska E, Obtulowicz K, Dyga W, et al. Contact hypersensitivity and allergic contact dermatitis among school children and teenagers with eczema. Contact Dermatitis 2009; 60:264.
- Belhadjali H, Mohamed M, Youssef M, et al. Contact sensitization in atopic dermatitis: results of a prospective study of 89 cases in Tunisia. Contact Dermatitis 2008; 58:188.
- Thyssen JP, Linneberg A, Engkilde K, et al. Contact sensitization to common haptens is associated with atopic dermatitis: new insight. Br J Dermatol 2012; 166:1255.
- Malajian D, Belsito DV. Cutaneous delayed-type hypersensitivity in patients with atopic dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol 2013; 69:232.
- Beck MH and Wilkinson SM. Contact Dermatitis: Allergic. In: Rook's Textbook of Dermatology, Eighth Edition, Burns T, BreathnachS, Cox N, Griffiths C. (Eds), Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford, UK 2010. Vol II.
- Cohen DE, Jacob SE. Allergic contact dermatitis. In: Fitzpatrick's Dermatology in General Medicine, 7th ed, Wolff K, Goldsmith LA, Katz SI, et al (Eds), McGraw-Hill Professional, 2007.
- Gardner KH, Davis MD, Richardson DM, Pittelkow MR. The hazards of moist toilet paper: allergy to the preservative methylchloroisothiazolinone/methylisothiazolinone. Arch Dermatol 2010; 146:886.
- Regional contact dermatitis. In: Fisher's Contact Dermatitis, 6th ed, Rietschel RL, Fowler JF Jr (Eds), BC Decker I, Hamilton, ON 2008. p.66.
- Kiebert G, Sorensen SV, Revicki D, et al. Atopic dermatitis is associated with a decrement in health-related quality of life. Int J Dermatol 2002; 41:151.
- Hutchings CV, Shum KW, Gawkrodger DJ. Occupational contact dermatitis has an appreciable impact on quality of life. Contact Dermatitis 2001; 45:17.
- Lever's Histopathology of the Skin, 10th ed, Elder DE, Elenitsas R, Johnson BL Jr, et al (Eds), Lippincott Williams & W, Philadelphia 2009.
- Beltrani VS, Beltrani VP. Contact dermatitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1997; 78:160.
- Bourke J, Coulson I, English J, British Association of Dermatologists. Guidelines for care of contact dermatitis. Br J Dermatol 2001; 145:877.
- Usatine RP, Riojas M. Diagnosis and management of contact dermatitis. Am Fam Physician 2010; 82:249.
- Rietschel RL. Clues to an accurate diagnosis of contact dermatitis. Dermatol Ther 2004; 17:224.
- Ale IS, Maibacht HA. Diagnostic approach in allergic and irritant contact dermatitis. Expert Rev Clin Immunol 2010; 6:291.
- Gupta K. Deciphering spongiotic dermatitides. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2008; 74:523.
- EPIDEMIOLOGY AND RISK FACTORS
- CLINICAL FEATURES
- Lesion morphology
- Lesion distribution
- DISEASE COURSE
- Clues from clinical examination
- Patch testing
- Laboratory tests and biopsy
- Response to empiric therapy
- DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS
- SOCIETY GUIDELINE LINKS
- SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS