Allergic contact dermatitis to in‐ear headphones occurring in the external ear

Abstract

All results were negative on D2 and D7. Our patient is currently on medical leave and remains asymptomatic. DISCUSSIONNo reports of airborne allergic contact dermatitis from PVA-based coating formulations (Opadry ® ) or yellow pigment in an occupational context were found in the literature.In our case, PT with excipients provided from the pharmaceutical laboratory was particularly important due to the lack of standardised commercial tests. The initial tests carried out with the entire finished formulation of the drugs were negative, probably because the concentration of excipients present in these was not high enough to trigger a PT reaction. Moreover, our case emphasizes the importance and relevance of identifying the exact culprit agent(s) in order to recommend and install appropriate avoidance measures. As excipients are rarely suspected, and usually considered hidden allergens, greater awareness concerning their sensitising potential may be needed. 4 In conclusion, we report a first case of occupational airborne allergic contact dermatitis from a PVA-based coating formulation (Opadry ® ). The widespread utilisation of polymers in diverse applications highlights their potential as (occupational) contact sensitizers.