2‐Hydroxyethyl Methacrylate, Methyl Methacrylate and Ethyl Acrylate Sensitisation: A 7‐Year Retrospective Study
Fuente:
Wiley Open Access
Guardado en:
| Autores principales: | , , , , |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Artículo Open Access |
| Publicado: |
Wiley
2025
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | |
| Etiquetas: |
Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
|
| _version_ | 1867012604582428672 |
|---|---|
| author | Mira Jagodich Dominik Németh Adrienn Tóth Zsuzsanna Zsófia Szalai Györgyi Pónyai |
| author_facet | Mira Jagodich Dominik Németh Adrienn Tóth Zsuzsanna Zsófia Szalai Györgyi Pónyai Mira Jagodich Dominik Németh Adrienn Tóth Zsuzsanna Zsófia Szalai Györgyi Pónyai |
| collection | Wiley Open Access |
| contents | 2‐Hydroxyethyl Methacrylate, Methyl Methacrylate and Ethyl Acrylate Sensitisation: A 7‐Year Retrospective Study Mira Jagodich Dominik Németh Adrienn Tóth Zsuzsanna Zsófia Szalai Györgyi Pónyai Contact Dermatitis ABSTRACT Background Acrylates are increasingly common contact allergens; sensitisation is frequently associated with nail products. No prior study has been found in the European literature in which both methyl methacrylate (MMA) and ethyl acrylate (EA), in addition to 2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2‐HEMA) were included in the standard baseline series. Objectives To investigate the prevalence and characteristics of 2‐HEMA, MMA and EA sensitisation at a university centre in Hungary. Methods This retrospective study included 2005 consecutive patients who underwent patch testing between 2018 and 2024 with the European baseline series (EBS) extended with 2‐HEMA (in 2018), MMA and EA. Results Out of the tested 2005 patients, 74 (3.7%) were positive for at least one of the three acrylates; among them 86.5% were women. Mostly the hands (70.3%) and the face (24.3%) were symptomatic. Nail product exposure was significantly more frequent among younger patients. 20.3% of the acrylate‐positive patients had no hypersensitivity to 2‐HEMA, only to MMA and/or EA. Reactions to 2‐HEMA and EA mostly appeared on D2, whereas MMA first reactions were predominantly on D7. Conclusion Our findings suggest that testing MMA and EA in the EBS would be beneficial. Evaluating patch tests until the 7th day is essential. 10.1111/cod.70054 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1111/cod.70054 |
| format | Artículo Open Access |
| id | wiley_oa_10_1111_cod_70054 |
| institution | Wiley Open Access |
| license_str_mv | http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publisher | Wiley |
| record_format | wiley_oa |
| spellingShingle | 2‐Hydroxyethyl Methacrylate, Methyl Methacrylate and Ethyl Acrylate Sensitisation: A 7‐Year Retrospective Study Mira Jagodich Dominik Németh Adrienn Tóth Zsuzsanna Zsófia Szalai Györgyi Pónyai Contact Dermatitis 2‐Hydroxyethyl Methacrylate, Methyl Methacrylate and Ethyl Acrylate Sensitisation: A 7‐Year Retrospective Study Mira Jagodich Dominik Németh Adrienn Tóth Zsuzsanna Zsófia Szalai Györgyi Pónyai Contact Dermatitis ABSTRACT Background Acrylates are increasingly common contact allergens; sensitisation is frequently associated with nail products. No prior study has been found in the European literature in which both methyl methacrylate (MMA) and ethyl acrylate (EA), in addition to 2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2‐HEMA) were included in the standard baseline series. Objectives To investigate the prevalence and characteristics of 2‐HEMA, MMA and EA sensitisation at a university centre in Hungary. Methods This retrospective study included 2005 consecutive patients who underwent patch testing between 2018 and 2024 with the European baseline series (EBS) extended with 2‐HEMA (in 2018), MMA and EA. Results Out of the tested 2005 patients, 74 (3.7%) were positive for at least one of the three acrylates; among them 86.5% were women. Mostly the hands (70.3%) and the face (24.3%) were symptomatic. Nail product exposure was significantly more frequent among younger patients. 20.3% of the acrylate‐positive patients had no hypersensitivity to 2‐HEMA, only to MMA and/or EA. Reactions to 2‐HEMA and EA mostly appeared on D2, whereas MMA first reactions were predominantly on D7. Conclusion Our findings suggest that testing MMA and EA in the EBS would be beneficial. Evaluating patch tests until the 7th day is essential. 10.1111/cod.70054 http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ |
| title | 2‐Hydroxyethyl Methacrylate, Methyl Methacrylate and Ethyl Acrylate Sensitisation: A 7‐Year Retrospective Study |
| topic | Contact Dermatitis |
| url | https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cod.70054 |