Contact sensitivity to 2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate in consecutive patients: A 1‐year multicentre SIDAPA study

Stingeni, Luca; Tramontana, Marta; Bianchi, Leonardo; Foti, Caterina; Patruno, Cataldo; Gallo, Rosella; Corazza, Monica; Schena, Donatella; Milanesi, Nicola; Guarneri, Fabrizio; Bini, Vittorio; Hansel, Katharina

doi:10.1111/cod.13278

Cited by 24 publications

(44 citation statements)

References 15 publications

(27 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Since 2016, the SIDAPA (Società Italiana Dermatologia Allergologica Professionale Ambientale) baseline series included 2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2‐HEMA) 2% pet. as a marker for contact allergy to acrylates and methacrylates, from now on referred to as (meth)acrylates. In the last 5 years, allergic contact dermatitis due to monomeric acrylic acid (CAS no.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acrylate and methacrylate allergy: When is patch testing with acrylic acid recommended?

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acrylate and methacrylate allergy: When is patch testing with acrylic acid recommended?

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…As noted earlier, uncured methacrylate monomers are noted as strong sensitizers 27,28 and have been noted to cause cross sensitivity with other methacrylates 5,18,19,41,42,49 and aldehydes 36,42 . Furthermore, some studies suggest that sensitization may also occur from contact with methacrylate‐containing aerosols 3,50 .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 80%

“…Second, substitution is replacing the hazard itself. Unfortunately, substitution with a different material is usually not successful as methacrylate materials are notorious for causing cross‐sensitization to other methacrylate products that people have not experienced previous exposure 3,5,18,19,41,42,49 . HEMA is presently recognized as a potent sensitizer 15 and some development and marketing of HEMA‐free adhesives has been noted 50,104 .…”

Section: Preventive Measuresmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Methacrylate perspective in current dental practice

Bishop

Roberts

2020

J Esthet Restor Dent

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: To provide a current perspective concerning dental personnel sensitivity to methacrylate materials. Overview: Methacrylate related sensitivity and allergies are currently beyond traditional thoughts concerning denture base resins and methyl methacrylate provisional materials. Methacrylates are now ubiquitous in current dental practice and dental personnel should be aware that dental adhesives contain potent sensitizers that may also cross-sensitize individuals to other methacrylates not experienced. The growing sensitivity to 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA) has been described to be epidemic in nature due to the artificial nail industry with dental patients and dental personnel may be more susceptible to dental methacrylate sensitization. While contact dermatitis remains the most prevalent methacrylate-related clinical presentation, respiratory complications and asthma are increasing associated with methacrylate exposure. While additional personal protective equipment (PPE) is thought to be first protective choice, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) considers PPE overall largely ineffective and should be considered only as a last resort. Conclusion: Dental personnel need to be more aware of methacrylate sources and use workplace control measures to limit methacrylate exposures to both dental personnel and patients. Clinical Significance: Sensitivity to methacrylate materials is a growing dental workplace major concern and dental personnel should be aware of both the methacrylate content of current materials and the products that contain ingredients with the most sensitization potential.

show abstract

“…and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (69.2% pos.). Routine patch testing with 2-HEMA in Italy identified 1.5% positive reactions in the 4025 patients tested [155]. Besides nail technicians in the numerous nail salons [156][157][158], home use of kits either for artificial nails or "long-lasting nail polish" offer other opportunities for sensitisation [159].…”

Section: Plastic Monomers and Rubbermentioning

confidence: 99%

Contact Allergy—Emerging Allergens and Public Health Impact

Uter

Werfel

Lepoittevin

et al. 2020

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Contact allergy (sensitisation) and allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) resulting from it have a considerable public health impact. For the present review, all pertinent articles were systematically searched via Medline and Web of Science™; additionally, all available issues of the journals “Contact Dermatitis” and “Dermatitis” were manually searched, covering the years 2018–2019, thereby extending and re-focusing a previous similar review. New allergens, or previously described allergens found in a new exposure context or of other current importance, are described in sections according to substance classes, e.g., metals, preservatives, fragrances. As a common finding in many investigations, a lack of information on product composition has been noted, for instance, regarding a newly described allergen in canvas shoes (dimethylthiocarbamylbenzothiazole sulfide) and, most notably, absence of co-operation from manufacturers of glucose-monitoring devices and insulin pumps, respectively. These latter devices have been shown to cause severe ACD in a considerable number of diabetic patients caused by the liberation of isobornyl acrylate and N,N’-dimethylacrylamide, respectively, as demonstrated by an international collaboration between dermatologists and chemists. Improved and complete ingredient labelling for all types of products, and not just as we have with cosmetics at present (apart from full listing of fragrance substances) in Europe, must be put on the legislative agenda.

show abstract

Contact sensitivity to 2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate in consecutive patients: A 1‐year multicentre SIDAPA study

Cited by 24 publications

References 15 publications

Acrylate and methacrylate allergy: When is patch testing with acrylic acid recommended?

Acrylate and methacrylate allergy: When is patch testing with acrylic acid recommended?

Methacrylate perspective in current dental practice

Contact Allergy—Emerging Allergens and Public Health Impact

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About