Contact dermatitis from glucose sensors in Spain: A multicentric approach.
Acrylates
/ adverse effects
Adult
Allergens
/ adverse effects
Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring
/ adverse effects
Camphanes
/ adverse effects
Child
Dermatitis, Allergic Contact
/ etiology
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1
/ drug therapy
Female
Humans
Insulin Infusion Systems
/ adverse effects
Male
Patch Tests
Spain
Young Adult
N,N dimethylacrylamide (CAS no. 2680-03-7)
acrylates
allergic contact dermatitis
glucose sensor
insulin pump
isobornyl acrylate (CAS 5888-33-5)
medical devices
patch test
Journal
Contact dermatitis
ISSN: 1600-0536
Titre abrégé: Contact Dermatitis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7604950
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Nov 2021
Nov 2021
Historique:
revised:
06
06
2021
received:
11
02
2021
accepted:
27
06
2021
pubmed:
30
6
2021
medline:
27
1
2022
entrez:
29
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Allergic contact dermatitis from glucose sensors may interfere with their ongoing application. To evaluate a series of Spanish patients with contact dermatitis to glucose sensors regarding former sources of contact allergens, patch test results, and outcomes from the ongoing use of the device. A series of patients with contact dermatitis from glucose sensors was investigated in eight dermatology departments across Spain (epidemiological features, brands, latency time to develop dermatitis, the ability to continue using the devices as well as the patch test results). Thirty patients were evaluated (mean age 20.9 years). A total of 66.7% were children and 66.7% female. Ninety per cent used Freestyle Libre (FSL). Eight of 26 (30.8%) reacted to isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) and two of 20 (10.0%) to N,N dimethylacrylamide (DMAA). The mean latency time to develop dermatitis was 9 months. Sixteen of 29 (55.2%) patients continued using the same sensor causing the reaction. Thirteen of 29 (44.8%) patients were unable to continue using the sensor because of severe reactions. Of these, five were positive to IBOA, one to IBOA and DMAA, one to DMAA, one to colophony, and one to isopropyl alcohol wipes. In one patient, the outcome was unknown. The frequency of sensitisation to IBOA and DMAA, was lower than in other European series, but similar to a previously published Spanish article. Legislation requiring manufacturers to provide information regarding the composition of medical devices and cooperate with the investigations into contact dermatitis is urgently needed.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Allergic contact dermatitis from glucose sensors may interfere with their ongoing application.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate a series of Spanish patients with contact dermatitis to glucose sensors regarding former sources of contact allergens, patch test results, and outcomes from the ongoing use of the device.
METHODS
METHODS
A series of patients with contact dermatitis from glucose sensors was investigated in eight dermatology departments across Spain (epidemiological features, brands, latency time to develop dermatitis, the ability to continue using the devices as well as the patch test results).
RESULTS
RESULTS
Thirty patients were evaluated (mean age 20.9 years). A total of 66.7% were children and 66.7% female. Ninety per cent used Freestyle Libre (FSL). Eight of 26 (30.8%) reacted to isobornyl acrylate (IBOA) and two of 20 (10.0%) to N,N dimethylacrylamide (DMAA). The mean latency time to develop dermatitis was 9 months. Sixteen of 29 (55.2%) patients continued using the same sensor causing the reaction. Thirteen of 29 (44.8%) patients were unable to continue using the sensor because of severe reactions. Of these, five were positive to IBOA, one to IBOA and DMAA, one to DMAA, one to colophony, and one to isopropyl alcohol wipes. In one patient, the outcome was unknown.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
The frequency of sensitisation to IBOA and DMAA, was lower than in other European series, but similar to a previously published Spanish article. Legislation requiring manufacturers to provide information regarding the composition of medical devices and cooperate with the investigations into contact dermatitis is urgently needed.
Substances chimiques
Acrylates
0
Allergens
0
Camphanes
0
isobornyl acrylate
IX0PRH184P
Types de publication
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
554-562Informations de copyright
© 2021 John Wiley & Sons A/S. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Gatica-Ortega ME, Pastor-Nieto MA. Dermatitis alérgica de contacto y otras dermatosis asociadas al uso de bombas de insulina y sensores de glucosa. Allergic contact dermatitis and other dermatosis related to the use of insulin pumps and glucose sensor sets. Piel. 2020;35(8):500-508.
Herman A, Aerts O, Baeck M, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by isobornyl acrylate in Freestyle® Libre, a newly introduced glucose sensor. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;77(6):367-373.
Passanisi S, Lombardo F, Barbalace A, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis and diabetes medical devices: 2 clinical cases. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;79(2):115-117.
Schwensen JF, Friis UF, Zachariae C, Johansen JD. Sensitization to cyanoacrylates caused by prolonged exposure to a glucose sensor set in a diabetic child. Contact Dermatitis. 2016;74(2):124-125.
Peeters C, Herman A, Goosens A, Bruze M, Mowitz M, Baeck M. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by 2-ethyl cyanoacrylate contained in glucose sensor sets in two diabetic adults. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;77(6):406-429.
Mowitz M, Herman A, Baeck M, et al. N,N-dimethylacrylamide-a new sensitizer in the FreeStyle Libre glucose sensor. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(1):27-31.
Ulriksdotter J, Svedman C, Bruze M, et al. Contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors-15 adult patients tested with a medical device patch test series. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;83(4):301-309.
Johansen JD, Aalto-Korte K, Agner T, et al. European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline for diagnostic patch testing - recommendations on best practice. Contact Dermatitis. 2015;73(4):195-221.
Gatica-Ortega M, Pastor-Nieto M, Torres-Aranda R, Luna-Bastante L, Pérez-Hortet C. Contact dermatitis from Miaomiao (an add-on transmitter to FreeStyle Libre Flash glucose monitoring sytstem). Contact Dermatitis. 2021;85(1):92-94.
Boletín Oficial del Estado 0685053 Orden SCO/710/2004,de 12 de marzo. https://www.boe.es/eli/es/o/2004/03/12/sco710. Accessed January 28, 2021.
Oppel E, Högg C, Summer B, Ruëff F, Reichl FX, Kamann S. Isobornyl acrylate contained in the insulin patch pump OmniPod as the cause of severe allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;79(3):178-180.
Raison-Peyron N, Mowitz M, Bonardel N, Aerts O, Bruze M. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by isobornyl acrylate in OmniPod, an innovative tubeless insulin pump. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;79(2):76-80.
Herman A, Baeck M, de Montjoye L, et al. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by isobornyl acrylate in the enlite glucose sensor and the paradigm MiniMed quickset insulin infusion set. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;8(6):432-437.
Kamann S, Oppel E, Liu F, Reichl FX, Heinemann L, Högg C. Evaluation of isobornyl acrylate content in medical devices for diabetes treatment. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2019;21(10):533-537.
Vidal-Albareda C, Yelmo-Valverde R, Solórzano-Zepeda C, Rodríguez-Muñoz N, De-la-HozCaballer B, González-de-Olano D. Prevalence of contact dermatitis to glucose sensors in pediatric population and the main allergens involved. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;83(1):47-49.
Dendooven E, Foubert K, Goossens A, et al. Concomitant positive patch test reactions in FreeStyle-allergic patients sensitized to isobornyl acrylate. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;84(3):166-174.
Queirós CS, Alexandre MI, Garrido PM, Correia TE, Filipe PL. Allergic contact dermatitis to IBOA in FreeStyle Libre: experience from a tertiary care Portuguese hospital. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;83(2):154-157.
Hyry HSI, Liippo JP, Virtanen HM. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors in type 1 diabetes patients. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(3):161-166.
Ulriksdotter J, Mowitz M, Svedman C, Bruze M. Patch testing and diagnosis when suspecting allergic contact dermatitis from medical devices. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;83(4):333-335.
Aerts O, Herman A, Mowitz M, Bruze M, Goossens A. Isobornyl acrylate. Dermatitis. 2020;31(1):4-12.
Herman A, de Montjoye L, Tromme I, Goossens A, Baeck M. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by medical devices for diabetes patients: A review. Contact Dermatitis. 2018;79(6):331-335.
Oppel E, Kamann S, Reichl F-X, Högg C. The Dexcom glucose monitoring system-An isobornyl acrylate-free alternative for diabetic patients. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(1):32-36.
Svedman C, de Bruze M, Antelmi A, et al. Continuous glucose monitoring systems give contact dermatitis in children and adults despite efforts of providing less "allergy- prone" devices investigation and advice hampered by insufficient material for optimized patch test investigations. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2020;35(3):730-737.
Oppel E, Kamann S, Heinemann L, Klein A, Reichl F-X, Högg C. Freestyle libre 2: the new isobornyl acrylate free generation. Contact Dermatitis. 2020;83(5):429-431.
Kamann S, Oppel E. Hydrocolloid blister plaster decreases allergic contact dermatitis caused by Freestyle Libre and isobornyl acrylate. Contact Dermatitis. 2019;81(5):380-381.