Improving povidone-iodine and iodine preparations for patch testing.
antiseptics
contact hypersensitivity
iodine
povidone-iodine
Journal
Contact dermatitis
ISSN: 1600-0536
Titre abrégé: Contact Dermatitis
Pays: England
ID NLM: 7604950
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
May 2021
May 2021
Historique:
revised:
04
12
2020
received:
07
10
2020
accepted:
08
12
2020
pubmed:
12
12
2020
medline:
4
11
2021
entrez:
11
12
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Allergy evaluation by patch testing with povidone-iodine (PVP-I) or iodine remains challenging, because current patch test preparations frequently lead to false-positive or irritant skin reactions. To investigate different preparations for iodine patch tests and to assess their clinical relevance with repeated open application tests (ROATs). We monocentrically analyzed 95 patients with suspected allergy to disinfectants in retrospect who underwent parallel iodine patch testing with four preparations: PVP-I 2% aq., 5% aq., 10% aq., and iodine 0.5% pet. In 27 of 95 patients (28.4%), we found positive reactions to one of the four test preparations. After ROATs in 22 of these 27 positively tested individuals, only one patient was diagnosed with iodine allergy. In contrast, 31 of 95 patients (32.6%) showed irritant or questionable patch test reactions on day 2 (D2) and/or D3 and/or D7 to one or more test preparations. Testing with PVP-I 2% aq. resulted in the lowest number of doubtful skin reactions while detecting the single allergic patient. PVP-I 2% aq. was found to be the optimal patch test preparation. In general, iodine allergy appears to be substantially overestimated, and positive patch test responses to iodine should prompt an urgent ROAT for confirmation before diagnosing iodine allergy.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Allergy evaluation by patch testing with povidone-iodine (PVP-I) or iodine remains challenging, because current patch test preparations frequently lead to false-positive or irritant skin reactions.
OBJECTIVES
OBJECTIVE
To investigate different preparations for iodine patch tests and to assess their clinical relevance with repeated open application tests (ROATs).
METHODS
METHODS
We monocentrically analyzed 95 patients with suspected allergy to disinfectants in retrospect who underwent parallel iodine patch testing with four preparations: PVP-I 2% aq., 5% aq., 10% aq., and iodine 0.5% pet.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In 27 of 95 patients (28.4%), we found positive reactions to one of the four test preparations. After ROATs in 22 of these 27 positively tested individuals, only one patient was diagnosed with iodine allergy. In contrast, 31 of 95 patients (32.6%) showed irritant or questionable patch test reactions on day 2 (D2) and/or D3 and/or D7 to one or more test preparations. Testing with PVP-I 2% aq. resulted in the lowest number of doubtful skin reactions while detecting the single allergic patient.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
PVP-I 2% aq. was found to be the optimal patch test preparation. In general, iodine allergy appears to be substantially overestimated, and positive patch test responses to iodine should prompt an urgent ROAT for confirmation before diagnosing iodine allergy.
Substances chimiques
Povidone-Iodine
85H0HZU99M
Iodine
9679TC07X4
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
332-337Subventions
Organisme : ProjektDEAL
Informations de copyright
© 2020 The Authors. Contact Dermatitis published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Références
Siggia S. The chemistry of polyvinylpyrrolidone-iodine. J Am Pharm Assoc Am Pharm Assoc. 1957;46(3):201-204.
Garnes AL, Davidson E, Taylor LE, Felix AJ, Shidlovsky BA, Prigot A. Clinical evaluation of povidone-iodine aerosol spray in surgical practice. Am J Surg. 1959;97(1):49-53.
Lee SK, Zhai H, Maibach HI. Allergic contact dermatitis from iodine preparations: a conundrum. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;52(4):184-187.
Iijima S, Kuramochi M. Investigation of irritant skin reaction by 10% povidone-iodine solution after surgery. Dermatology. 2002;204(suppl 1):103-108.
Amschler K, Fuchs T, Geier J, Buhl T. In search of a better patch test concentration for povidone-iodine. Contact Dermatitis. 2017;77(5):346-347.
Dickel H. Zur Methodik der Epikutantestung und klinischen Relevanzbeurteilung. Allergo J. 2017;26(1):16-19.
Lachapelle JM. Allergic contact dermatitis from povidone-iodine: a re-evaluation study. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;52(1):9-10.
Mahler V, Nast A, Bauer A, et al. S3 guidelines: epicutaneous patch testing with contact allergens and drugs - short version, part 2. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2019;17(11):1187-1207.
Mahler V, Nast A, Bauer A, et al. S3 guidelines: epicutaneous patch testing with contact allergens and drugs - short version, part 1. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges. 2019;17(10):1076-1093.
de la Cuadra-Oyanguren J, Zaragozá-Ninet V, Sierra-Talamantes C, Alegre de Miquel V. Postsurgical contact dermatitis due to povidone iodine: a diagnostic dilemma. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2014;105(3):300-304.
Nishioka K, Seguchi T, Yasuno H, Yamamoto T, Tominaga K. The results of ingredient patch testing in contact dermatitis elicited by povidone-iodine preparations. Contact Dermatitis. 2000;42(2):90-94.
Borrego L, Hernández N, Hernández Z, Peñate Y. Povidone-iodine induced post-surgical irritant contact dermatitis localized outside of the surgical incision area. Report of 27 cases and a literature review. Int J Dermatol. 2016;55(5):540-545.
Rees A, Sherrod Q, Young L. Chemical burn from povidone-iodine: case and review. J Drugs Dermatol. 2011;10(4):414-417.
Darouiche RO, Wall MJ Jr, Itani KM, et al. Chlorhexidine-alcohol versus povidone-iodine for surgical-site antisepsis. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(1):18-26.
Lee I, Agarwal RK, Lee BY, Fishman NO, Umscheid CA. Systematic review and cost analysis comparing use of chlorhexidine with use of iodine for preoperative skin antisepsis to prevent surgical site infection. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2010;31(12):1219-1229.
Dittmann K, Schmidt T, Müller G, et al. Susceptibility of livestock-associated methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (LA-MRSA) to chlorhexidine digluconate, octenidine dihydrochloride, polyhexanide, PVP-iodine and triclosan in comparison to hospital-acquired MRSA (HA-MRSA) and community-aquired MRSA (CA-MRSA): a standardized comparison. Antimicrob Resist Infect Control. 2019;8(1):122.