Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Octyl Cyanoacrylate Skin Glue after Surgical Wound Closure: A Systematic Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: The rising incidence of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) after cyanoacrylate adhesive use necessitates a comprehensive understanding of its clinical presentations, risk factors, and management. In this systematic review, we conducted an exhaustive search following PRISMA guidelines within Medline and PubMed databases to identify studies reporting cases of ACD resulting from cyanoacrylate adhesive application in wound closure. A total of 47 studies, covering 193 ACD cases, were included in our analysis. These cases involved 35 male, 120 female patients, and 38 cases without gender information (M:F ratio = 1:3.43), with ages ranging from 7 to 92 years (mean age 43.9 years). The majority of cases ( n = 140) were part of 6 orthopedic studies, focusing on joint replacements ( n = 68), orthopedic surgeries ( n = 38), and breast surgeries ( n = 29). The remaining 58 cases encompassed various surgical procedures. Common clinical manifestations included swelling, pruritic rash, erythema, vesicles, and itching around the surgical sites, typically appearing around 10 days post-adhesive application (within a range of 6 hours to 6 weeks). Patients with prior exposure to 2-octyl cyanoacrylate tended to exhibit earlier symptoms. Similar rates of dermatitis were observed across different adhesive brands, suggesting brand independence. Treatment strategies involved adhesive removal, administration of steroids and antihistamines, meticulous wound care, and, in some cases, surgical intervention. Notably, 3.1% of the 193 cases required surgical intervention. Risk factors, including a history of atopic dermatitis, high body mass index, diabetes, prior adhesive exposure, and surgical history, were identified in the studies. Patch tests confirmed 2-octyl cyanoacrylate as the allergen in 21 studies. Our review aims to enhance health care professionals' understanding of ACD resulting from the use of cyanoacrylate adhesive, facilitating improved postsurgical management and prevention strategies. Recognizing diverse risk factors, understanding varying clinical presentations, distinguishing ACD from infection, and employing appropriate treatment approaches are essential for achieving optimal outcomes in such cases.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".