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.
Journal
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV
ISSN: 1468-3083
Titre abrégé: J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol
Pays: England
ID NLM: 9216037
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Mar 2021
Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
14
07
2020
accepted:
18
09
2020
pubmed:
10
10
2020
medline:
15
5
2021
entrez:
9
10
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Medical devices are increasingly being reported to cause contact allergic dermatitis reactions. Review of patients with diabetes type I referred for suspected allergic contact dermatitis to insulin pump or glucose sensor systems. We have reviewed 11 referred diabetes mellitus patients investigated for allergic contact dermatitis reactions to medical devices and specifically Dexcom G6 The majority of patients was children, the majority had relevant allergies and particularly allergy to isobornyl acrylate which was also found in the glucose sensor system Dexcom G6 The following case reports bring in focus the fact that patients sensitized through use of one medical device and being advised the use of another, or find another product for a while useful, are not by necessity free from future episodes of allergic contact dermatitis. The case reports emphasize the need for collaboration since it is impossible for even well-equipped laboratories to properly investigate the medical devices when information on the substances used in production is not uniform and complete and material to investigate are scarce. The importance of adequate patch test series and testing with own material and furthermore the importance to re-analyse medical devices and re-analyse test data are emphasized.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Medical devices are increasingly being reported to cause contact allergic dermatitis reactions.
OBJECTIVE
OBJECTIVE
Review of patients with diabetes type I referred for suspected allergic contact dermatitis to insulin pump or glucose sensor systems.
METHOD
METHODS
We have reviewed 11 referred diabetes mellitus patients investigated for allergic contact dermatitis reactions to medical devices and specifically Dexcom G6
RESULTS
RESULTS
The majority of patients was children, the majority had relevant allergies and particularly allergy to isobornyl acrylate which was also found in the glucose sensor system Dexcom G6
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The following case reports bring in focus the fact that patients sensitized through use of one medical device and being advised the use of another, or find another product for a while useful, are not by necessity free from future episodes of allergic contact dermatitis. The case reports emphasize the need for collaboration since it is impossible for even well-equipped laboratories to properly investigate the medical devices when information on the substances used in production is not uniform and complete and material to investigate are scarce. The importance of adequate patch test series and testing with own material and furthermore the importance to re-analyse medical devices and re-analyse test data are emphasized.
Substances chimiques
Allergens
0
Blood Glucose
0
Camphanes
0
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
730-737Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.
Références
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: 367-373.
Raison-Peyron N, Mowitz M, Bonardel N et al. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by isobornyl acrylate in OmniPod, an innovative tubeless insulin pump. Contact Dermatitis 2018; 79: 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 Quick-set insulin infusion set. Contact Dermatitis 2019; 81: 432-437.
Hyry HSI, Liippo JP, Virtanen HM. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors in type 1 diabetes patients. Contact Dermatitis 2019; 81: 161-166.
Mowitz M, Herman A, Baeck M et al. N, N-dimethylacrylamide-a new sensitizer in the FreeStyle Libre glucose sensor. Contact Dermatitis 2019; 81: 27-31.
Boom BW, van Driel LM. Allergic contact dermatitis to epoxy resin in infusion sets of an insulin pump. Contact Dermatitis 1985; 12: 280.
Peeters C, Herman A, Goossens A et al. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by 2-ethyl cyanoacrylate contained in glucose sensor sets in two diabetic adults. Contact Dermatitis 2017; 77: 426-429.
Sora ND, Shashpal F, Bond EA et al. Insulin pumps: review of technological advancement in diabetes management. Am J Med Sci 2019; 358: 326-331.
van Beers CAJ, DeVries JH, Kleijer SJ et al. Continuous glucose monitoring for patients with type 1 diabetes and impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia (IN CONTROL): a randomised, open-label, crossover trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol 2016; 4: 893-902.
Sveriges Kommuner och Landsting Barn med typ 1-diabetes Nationellt Vårdprogram för Behandling med Insulinpump och KontinuerligGlukosmätning. Bestnr: 5465 Text: Nationella arbetsgruppenför diabetes, 2018.
Samuelsson U, Steineck I, Gudbjornsdottir S. A high mean-HbA1c 3-15 months after diagnosis of type 1 diabetes in childhood is related to metabolic control, macroalbuminuria, and retinopathy in early adulthood - a pilot-study using two nation-wide population based quality registries. Pediatr Diabetes 2014; 15: 229-235.
Hofer S, Raile K, Froelich-Reiterer E et al. On behalf of the Austrian/German Diabetes Patienten Verlaufsdokumentation (DPV Initiative) and the German Competence Network for Diabetes Mellitus. Tracking of metabolic control from childhood to young adulthood in type 1 diabetes. J Pediatr 2014; 165: 956-961.
Berg AK, Nørgaard K, Thyssen JP et al. Skin problems associated with insulin pumps and sensors in adults with type 1 diabetes: a cross-sectional study. Diabetes Technol Ther 2018; 20: 475-482.
Asarani NAM, Reynolds AN, Boucher SE et al. Cutaneous complications with continuous or flash glucose monitoring use: systematic review of trials and observational studies. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2020; 14: 328-337.
Berg AK, Thorsen SU, Thyssen JP et al. Cost of treating skin problems in patients with diabetes who use insulin pumps and/or glucose sensors. Diabetes Technol Ther 2020; 22: 658-665.
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: 301-309.
Herman A, Darrigade A-S, de Montjoye L et al. Contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors in diabetic children. Contact Dermatitis 2020; 82: 105-111.
Berg AK, Olsen BS, Thyssen JP et al. High frequencies of dermatological complications in children using insulin pumps or sensors. Pediatr Diabetes 2018; 19: 733-740.
Lombardo F, Salzano G, Crisafulli G et al. Allergic contact dermatitis in pediatric patients with type 1 diabetes: an emerging issue. Diabetes Res Clin Pract 2020; 162: 108089.
Kamann S, Oppel E, Liu F et al. Evaluation of isobornyl acrylate content in medical devices for diabetes treatment. Diabetes Technol Ther 2019; 21: 533-537.
Oppel E, Kamann S, Reichl FX et al. The Dexcom glucose monitoring system-An isobornyl acrylate-free alternative for diabetic patients. Contact Dermatitis 2019; 81: 32-36.
Gisin V, Chan A, Welsh JB. Manufacturing process changes and reduced skin irritations of an adhesive patch used for continuous glucose monitoring devices. J Diabetes Sci Technol 2018; 12: 725-726.
Fregert S. Manual of Contact Dermatitis, Munksgaard, Copenhagen, 1981.
Johansen JD, Aalto-Korte K, Agner T et al. European Society of Contact Dermatitis guidelines for diagnostic patch testing -recommendations on best practice. Contact Dermatitis 2015; 73: 195-221.
Hindsén M, Bruze M, Christensen OB. Flare-up reactions after oral challenge with nickel in relation to challenge dose and intensity and time of previous patch test reactions. J Am Acad Dermatol 2001; 44: 616-623.
Hamnerius N, Mowitz M. Intense skin reaction to a new glucose monitoring and insulin pump system. Contact Dermatitis 2020; 83: 524-527.
Herman A, Mowitz M, Aerts O et al. Unexpected positive patch test reactions to sesquiterpene lactones in patients sensitized to the glucose sensor FreeStyle Libre. Contact Dermatitis 2019; 81: 354-367.
Regulation (EU) 2017/745 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on medical devices amending Directive 2001/83/EC, Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 and Regulation (EC) No 1223/2009 and repealing Council Directives 90/385/EEC and 93/42/EEC.
Regulation (EU) 2017/746 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 5 April 2017 on in vitro diagnostic medical devices and repealing Directive 98/79/EC and Commission Decision 2010/227/EU.
Bruze M, Dahlquist I, Fregert S. Patch testing with colophony at 60% concentration. Contact Dermatitis 1986; 15: 193.
Hamnerius N, Mowitz M. Two cases of contact allergic reactions to Finn Chamber AQUA test chambers. Contact Dermatitis 2019; 81: 320-322.
Simonsen AB, Foss-Skiftesvik MH, Thyssen JP et al. Contact allergy in Danish children: current trends. Contact Dermatitis 2018; 79: 295-302.
Ulriksdotter J, Mowitz M, Svedman C et al. Patch testing and diagnosis when suspecting allergic contact dermatitis from medical devices. Contact Dermatitis 2020; 83: 333-335.