Occupational Sensitization to Acrylates With Paresthesias
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
To the Editor A 23-year-old woman, dental assistant for 5 years, was referred to our center for evaluation of a 3-month history of eczematous lesions on the dorsum and fingertips of both hands (Fig. 1). Also, the patient complained of itching and tingling sensation in the same location. There was a personal history of allergic rhinitis. On physical examination, we observed decreased thermoalgesic sensitivity in fingertips. In her workplace, the patient managed daily adhesives and composite resins and always wore vinyl gloves when dealing with these substances.Figure 1: Symmetric erythematous and edematous patches on hand’s dorsum.Patch testing was performed with the Spanish Contact Dermatitis Society baseline series (True Test and Chemotechnique Diagnostics AB) and dental series (Table 1) (Chemotechnique Diagnostics AB). The patches were removed on day 2. Readings at days 2, 3, and 6 showed positive reaction to thiuram mix and several acrylates. Curiously, the patient presented a wide extension of the positive reactions on the acrylates patches, as well objective thermalgesic sensitivity reduction in the same location (Fig. 2A). Upon performing patch testing, there was only residual dermatitis on both hands. Three weeks later, we retested the acrylates separately to verify which ones actually the patient was sensitized and obtained positivity to ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (Fig. 2B). To date, and 6 months after the initial evaluation, the patient was given a disability by the Labour Department and had no relapse of her dermatitis, despite that the decreased sensitivity in fingertips persists.Table 1: Dental ScreeningFigure 2: A, Positive and wide extension of the acrylates patch tests. B, After performing patch testing with the acrylates separately, positive reactions to ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate were obtained.The decrease in sensitivity due to acrylic monomers has been documented in the occupational setting in orthopedic surgeons1 and in dentists.2 Fisher3 described the first case of prolonged and severe paresthesia in a client after a procedure of sculptured nails, and subsequently, other authors reported more cases, but to our knowledge, our case represents the first report of decreased sensitivity in the positive acrylic patch test. This altered sensitivity is the result of a peripheral neuropathy, the exact pathophysiological mechanism of which is not yet established, and is independent of allergic contact sensitization. When present, it may persist for several weeks after the resolution of the dermatitis. Donaghy et al4 studied histological sections of nerve biopsy of a dental technician with paresthesias and motor impairment of long evolution and found a chronic axonopathy with severe loss of large-diameter fibers and unmyelinated axons. Animal models in mice demonstrated that acrylates have a neurotoxic effect when applied locally, and recent studies support the theory that they interfere with the fast axonal transport.5 In summary, to our knowledge, this is the first report of decreased sensitivity on positive acrylate patches. The decrease in sensitivity after exposure to acrylates is not very common but can be persistent and debilitating, so dermatologists and neurologists should be aware of its existence. Ana Rita Rodrigues-Barata, MD Luis Conde-Salazar Gomez, MD Department of Occupational Dermatology Instituto de Salud Carlos III Madrid, Spain [email protected] José Eduardo Campos Arceo, MD Department of Dermatology Instituto Dermatológico de Jalisco Guadalajara, México Leo Barco, MD Department of Dermatology Clinica Mediterranea Almeria, Spain
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».