...
首页> 外文期刊>Contact dermatitis >Fragrance mix I patch test reactions in 5006 consecutive dermatitis patients tested simultaneously with TRUE Test(R) and Trolab(R) test material.
【24h】

Fragrance mix I patch test reactions in 5006 consecutive dermatitis patients tested simultaneously with TRUE Test(R) and Trolab(R) test material.

机译:用TRUETest®和Trolab®测试材料同时测试的5006名连续性皮炎患者的香精混合物I贴剂测试反应。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of contact allergy to fragrance mix (FM) I varies from study to study, depending on factors such as test population, patch test material, and technique. OBJECTIVES: To compare the outcome of routine patch testing with FM I TRUE Test and FM I Trolab. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 5006 consecutive eczema patients were patch tested with both patch test materials according to the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group. RESULTS: A total of 9.9% patients tested had a positive reaction to one of the FM I mixes; 4.4% to FM I TRUE Test, 9.3% to FM I Trolab, and 3.7% to both (P < 0.0001). Patients with a stronger reaction to FM I TRUE Test almost all reacted to FM I Trolab, whereas the reverse situation showed a lower association. Clinical relevance of a positive patch test reaction to FM I TRUE Test was found in 73.0%, and clinical relevance of a positive patch test reaction to FM I Trolab was found in 64.3%; 68.4% of the patients with a positive reaction to FM I TRUE Test and 54.3% with a positive reaction to FM I Trolab were positive to one or more of the eight constituents of the mix. Limitations: The study is retrospective, and supplementary testing with FM components in patients with a positive reaction to the mixes was performed in a selected group of patients. Determination of clinical relevance may be biased. CONCLUSIONS: From this study, we cannot conclude which of the two FM I test preparations is the best for diagnostic purposes. Inclusion of both FM I tests in the baseline series to obtain a graded degree of FM I allergy for the individual patient is one option. Prospective controlled patch test studies with FM I patch test material are recommended.
机译:背景:接触过敏对香料混合物(FM)I的流行因研究而异,具体取决于测试人群,贴剂测试材料和技术等因素。目的:比较常规补丁测试与FM I TRUE测试和FM I Trolab的结果。材料与方法:根据国际接触性皮炎研究小组的研究,用这两种贴剂测试材料对总共5006例连续性湿疹患者进行了贴剂测试。结果:总共9.9%的患者对一种FM I混合物产生了阳性反应。 FM I TRUE测试为4.4%,FM I Trolab为9.3%,两者均为3.7%(P <0.0001)。对FM I TRUE测试反应更强的患者几乎都对FM I Trolab做出反应,而相反的情况则显示出较低的关联。阳性结果与FM I TRUE检验的临床相关性为73.0%,阳性结果与FM I Trolab的临床相关性为64.3%;对FM I TRUE测试呈阳性反应的患者中有68.4%,对FM I Trolab呈阳性反应的患者中有54.3%对混合物的八种成分中的一种或多种呈阳性。局限性:这项研究是回顾性的,并且在选定的一组患者中对混合物产生阳性反应的患者进行了FM成分的补充测试。临床相关性的确定可能会有偏差。结论:根据这项研究,我们不能得出两种FM I测试准备中哪一种最适合诊断的结论。一种选择是将两个FM I测试包括在基线系列中,以获得针对每个患者的FM I过敏等级。建议使用FM I贴片测试材料进行前瞻性对照贴片测试研究。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号