{"title":"牙科工作者对丙烯酸酯的后期斑贴试验反应。","authors":"J F Fowler","doi":"10.1053/AJCD01000224","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>A dental technician developed eyelid and hand dermatitis. She had been previously patch-tested elsewhere with a sample of an acrylic material from a nail salon that reportedly was positive only after 1 month. Repeat testing with ethyl acrylate and methyl methacrylate gave no reaction at 48 or 96 hours, but became positive 5 weeks later. This very late reaction is probably a true allergic manifestation and not a case of active sensitization.</p>","PeriodicalId":7612,"journal":{"name":"American journal of contact dermatitis : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1999-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Late patch test reaction to acrylates in a dental worker.\",\"authors\":\"J F Fowler\",\"doi\":\"10.1053/AJCD01000224\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>A dental technician developed eyelid and hand dermatitis. She had been previously patch-tested elsewhere with a sample of an acrylic material from a nail salon that reportedly was positive only after 1 month. Repeat testing with ethyl acrylate and methyl methacrylate gave no reaction at 48 or 96 hours, but became positive 5 weeks later. This very late reaction is probably a true allergic manifestation and not a case of active sensitization.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7612,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American journal of contact dermatitis : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1999-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American journal of contact dermatitis : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1053/AJCD01000224\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American journal of contact dermatitis : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1053/AJCD01000224","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Late patch test reaction to acrylates in a dental worker.
A dental technician developed eyelid and hand dermatitis. She had been previously patch-tested elsewhere with a sample of an acrylic material from a nail salon that reportedly was positive only after 1 month. Repeat testing with ethyl acrylate and methyl methacrylate gave no reaction at 48 or 96 hours, but became positive 5 weeks later. This very late reaction is probably a true allergic manifestation and not a case of active sensitization.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
