Background: Medical devices (MD) in close skin-contact for a prolonged time, such as glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, are a risk factor for contact allergy, and there has been an increase in patients using these. Correct diagnosis demands targetted testing.Objectives: We report a new allergen in a continuous CGM system in which the adhesive was changed. The allergy pattern of the patients diagnosed is reported. Methods:The three patients reported were patch tested with an MD series, own material, and possible allergens found through analysis with gas chromatographymass spectrometry, comparing analysis from the CGM system before and after change.Results: The patients were sensitized to isobornyl acrylate (IBOA), found in previously used devices and the present CGM. Apart from IBOA, the culprit allergen was found to be 2,2 0 -methylenebis(6-tert-butyl-4-methylphenol) monoacrylate. Conclusion:Allergic contact dermatitis due to CGM systems and insulin pumps are difficult to investigate and require chemical analysis. Because of the lack of information on substances used in the production, and when changes with MDs are initiated, it is difficult to advise patients, especially since they risk sensitization to several allergens. The use of MDs has increased and, thus, the need for collaboration between manufacturers, clinicians, and patient organizations.2,2'-methylenebis(6-tert-butyl-4-methylphenol) monoacrylate, allergic contact dermatitis, contact allergy, diabetes type I, gas chromatography-mass spectrometry glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, isobornyl acrylate medical device | INTRODUCTIONInvestigating patients with suspected allergic contact dermatitis to medical devices (MDs), such as continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, intermittently scanned glucose monitoring (isCGM)/flash glucose monitoring systems, and insulin pumps, is complicated. 1 The diagnosis has to be suspected and the patient must be patch tested with the right substances. The investigation should also include patch testing with the patient's own material. This testing may, however, result in false negative reactions since the concentration of allergens

Background: Contact allergy to oxidized (ox.) linalool and ox. limonene has been reported to have a high prevalence, raising the question of inclusion into the baseline series. However, several important issues should be clarified and further investigated before inclusion can be warranted.Objectives: To report the trends of ox. terpenes allergy in patients with dermatitis, features of the patch test reactions, and clinical characteristics of the patients.Methods: A retrospective analysis of 5773 patients was performed. All patients were patch tested with baseline series, individual ingredients of fragrance mix I and II, ox. linalool, and ox. limonene from 2013 to 2020. Results:The prevalence rates of contact allergy to ox. linalool and ox. limonene were 7.0% and 5.1%, respectively. Significantly increasing trends of contact allergy were observed. More than 95% of contact allergy cases were identified on Day 3/4.Patients with contact allergy to ox. linalool and ox. limonene were significantly younger than those with contact allergy to other fragrances and were predominantly female. Strong reactions were associated with older age and multiple fragrance allergies.Conclusions: Contact allergy to ox. linalool and ox. limonene is becoming increasingly important, and findings show intriguing features. More studies concerning the clinical relevance before recommending these substances for screening are required.

A relatively high frequency of contact allergy to Cr(VI) was found. The cause has shifted from cement exposure to other exposures, probably mainly leather.

Background: Regularly updating the prevalence of fragrance contact allergy (CA) is important. Patch testing with fragrance markers in the baseline series and the ingredients of fragrance mixes (FMs) is still debated.Objectives: To update the prevalence and clinical characteristics of patients with fragrance CA. To establish the results of patch testing with individual allergens of FMs.Methods: A retrospective analysis of 3539 patients with dermatitis who were patch tested with the baseline series and FMs ingredients during 2016 to 2020 was performed.Results: The prevalence of fragrance CA was 13%. About 10% of these patients with fragrance CA would be missed if the individual ingredients were not tested. Unlike hydroxyisohexyl 3-cyclohexene carboxaldehyde, there was no decreasing trend of CA to Evernia prunastri (oakmoss) extract after the EU regulation came into force.Patients with CA from only one ingredient of the mixes or having a weak positive reaction to the ingredients were significantly missed when tested with only the fragrance markers in the baseline series.