A Review on Therapeutic Potential of Indian Herbal Plants to Counter Viral Infection and Disease Pathogenesis

Herbal plant extracts or purified phytocomponents have been extensively used to treat several diseases since ancient times. The Indian Ayurvedic system and Chinese traditional medicines have documented the medicinal properties of important herbs. In Ayurveda, the polyherbal formulation is known to exhibit better therapeutic efficacy compared to a single herb. This review focuses on six key ayurvedic herbal plants namely, Tinospora cordifolia, Withania somnifera, Glycyrrhiza glabra/Licorice, Zingiber officinale, Emblica officinalis and Ocimum sanctum. These plants possess specific phytocomponents that aid them in fighting infections and keeping body healthy and stress-free. Plants were selected due to their reported antimicrobial and anti-inflammatory effects in several diseases and effectiveness in controlling viral pathogenesis. An ad-vanced literature search was carried out using Pubmed and google scholar. Result(s): These medicinal plants are known to exhibit several protective features against various diseases or infections. Here we have particularly emphasized on antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, anti-microbial and immunomodulatory properties which are common in these six plants. Recent literature analysis has revealed Ashwagandha to be protective for Covid-19 too. The formulation from such herbs can exhibit synergism and hence better effectiveness against infection and related dis-eases. The importance of these medicinal herbs becomes highly prominent as it maintains the har-monious balance by way of boosting the immunity in a human body. Further, greater mechanistic analyses are required to prove their efficacy in fighting infectious diseases like Covid-19. It opens the arena for in-depth research of identifying and isolating the active components from these herbs and evaluating their potency to inhibit viral infections as polyherbal formulations.Copyright © 2023 Bentham Science Publishers.

Acute angioedena attacks after COVID-19 disease or COVID-19 vaccination in a population afflicted with hereditary angioedema

Background: Few studies demonstrating the involvement of the complement system in COVID-19 pathogenesis have been published, suggesting its role in pulmonary symptoms and endothelial permeability, which is known to be crucial in the origin of Hereditary Angioedema (HAE).1 Post-morten tissue of COVID-19 patients reported depots of complement, activated by the lectin pathway, in type I and II alveolar epithelial cells.2 After this evidence and the link that infectious processes have as triggers of angioedema episodes, in patients with HAE, we propose to study the implication of both the infection and de doses of the COVID vaccine, in the appearance of episodes of angioedema in our population with a diagnos is of HAE. Method(s): Telemedicine interventions (telephone consultations) were carried out by trained Allergists from Hospital Universitario de Canarias, reaching out patients with a confirmed diagnosis of HEA by Skin Allergy Unit (SAU) within the local health district. Result(s): A total of 17 (11 females) were finally screened, and 2 (11.76%) passed a confirmed COVID-19 disease in January 2022 associating no acute attacks or need for rescue medication. Both subjects were fully vaccinated (3 doses-schedule) prior to the infection and suffered from a COVID-19 mild disease only. Only an individual dose of COVID-19 vaccination (Vaxzevria, Astra-Zeneca) -out of 40 overall given doses in 15 subjects and 3 different brands-was associated to an acute episode of abdominal swelling demanding immediate self-administered rescue therapy (icatibant) thus, preventing the patient from rushing to the Emergency Department. The subsequent 2 doses of the COVID-19 vaccination were safely scheduled in the same patient. Conclusion(s): In accordance with former reports4, only mild COVID-19 symptoms were associated in subjects with a confirmed diagnosis of HAE.

Allergic contact dermatitis to the elastic bands of an N95 mask

Case report Introduction: In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, occupational contact dermatitis related to the use of personal protective equipment (PPE) has become increasingly prevalent. While most cases are irritant in nature, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) remains an important cause of occupational dermatitis. We report a case of ACD to rubber accelerators in the elastic bands of an N95 mask. Informed consent was obtained from the patient for this report. Case Report: A 27-year-old healthcare worker presented with a progressive pruritic eruption over her face and neck, 1 week after she began wearing N95 masks at work. She had only worn disposable surgical masks. She had no medical history apart from hand dermatitis, which was well controlled with topical medications. Examination revealed linear eczematous plaques along her lateral cheeks and posterior neck, corresponding to contact areas between the mask bands and her skin. Patch tests revealed a positive reaction to several rubber accelerators, including Thimerosal, 2-Mercaptobenzothiazole (MBT), and Methylisothiazolinone. We performed another patch test to several N95 mask straps, to which the patient developed an eczematous reaction to the elastic bands of 2 N95 mask types with elastic bands. Clarification with the manufacturer confirmed the use of rubber accelerators similar in properties to MBT in the production of these masks. A diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis to rubber accelerator was made. The patient's dermatitis resolved with topical corticosteroids and the avoidance of N95 masks with elastic bands. Discussion and Conclusion(s): The use of facial PPE such as masks is a recognised cause of occupational dermatitis among healthcare workers. A variety of dermatoses are associated with the use of facial PPE, with contact dermatitis being the most common. However, while the majority of contact dermatitis are irritant in nature, ACD remains an important and preventable cause of occupational dermatitis. Commonly implicated allergens associated with mask use include preservatives and adhesives used in their production, as well as metals in the nose clip. Although less common, mask elastic bands have also been reported to be a potential source of ACD, with rubber accelerators being identified as potential allergens. However, there is often a lack of declaration of such chemicals used in the production of PPE. Given the need for continued use in the occupational setting, early identification and avoidance of allergens are key. Failure to do so may result in the progression of skin lesions, ultimately affecting the patients' quality of life and work performance. With the ubiquitous use of masks in the current climate, we wish to highlight the need for greater awareness of rubber accelerators as potential allergens, and their presence in the elastic bands of frequently used PPE.

Desensitization protocol for anti-SARS- CoV- 2 vaccines in allergic patients: A case series

Background: Vaccination has proven to be the best viable tool for preventing the spread of SarsCov2 infection. The fear of adverse events represents one of the limits of this vaccination campaign. As Allergists, we had a fundamental role evaluating the allergological risks and performing specific tests. The only absolute contraindication to SARS-CoV- 2 vaccination is hypersensitivity to its components. When an individual is allergic to an indispensable medication, it is possible to resort to desensitization. Given the lack of a standardized scheme, the aim of our study is to propose a desensitization protocol for anti-SARS- CoV- 2 vaccines. Method(s): The desensitization protocol we developed consists in the fractioned administration of the entire vaccine dose into 5 separate injections of increasing quantity, through a 2-hour period. Premedication with antihistamines and chromones was administrated. Between January 2021 and January 2022, 23 patients referred to our Unit were deemed with a high risk of hypersensitivity reactions to the vaccines and underwent the desensitization protocol. We here describe 23 consecutive cases of patients who underwent desensitization to anti-SARS- CoV- 2 vaccine. Result(s): 4/23 had positive allergy skin test to Polysorbate and underwent desensitization for their entire vaccination cycle. 19/23 had a previous hypersensitivity reaction to an anti-SARS- CoV- 2 vaccine (18 after the first dose and 1 after the second one). Among 4 patients with sensitization to Polysorbate none developed hypersensitivity reactions after fractionated administration of BNT162b2 vaccine. Among 19 patients that underwent desensitization because of hypersensitivity reactions after I or II dose of vaccine, 15 experienced a reaction following vaccination with BNT162b2, 4 with mRNA-1273 and 4 with ChAdOx1-S recombinant. Furthermore, we categorized their reactions according to WAO score per systemic reactions: 15/19 (79%) grade1, 2/19 (10.5%) grade2, 2/19 (10.5%) grade3. No severe late hypersensitivity reactions were observed. All but one of this 19 patients had no hypersensitivity reactions after vaccination through the desensitization protocol. 1 patient experienced anaphylaxis during desensitization with BNT162b2 vaccine (WAO grade4). No late hypersensitivity reactions were observed. Overall, 22/23 (95.6%) patients that underwent anti-SARS- CoV- 2 vaccination through the desensitization protocol did not experience hypersensitivity reactions. Conclusion(s): Our results suggest that desensitization can be implemented to extend the vaccination to currently ineligible individuals. Larger studies are needed to prove the safety and efficacy of this approach.

Epidemiological characteristics and disease spectrum analysis of outpatients in the dermatology department of a hospital in Wuhan during the COVID-19 epidemic.

Objective: To investigate epidemiological characteristics of outpatients and disease spectrum in the dermatology department during the COVID-19 epidemic Methods: A retrospective comparison of outpatient visits, gender, age and disease types in the dermatology department of Wuhan No.1 Hospital was performed between COVID-19 epidemic period (from 23th January 2020 to 15th April 2020) and the same period in 2019. Enumeration data were analyzed by Pearson's chi-square test. Result(s): During the COVID-19 epidemic, the number of outpatient visits to the dermatology department of the hospital decreased markedly, and the average daily number of outpatient visits (236 visits/day) was only 8.81% of that during the same period in 2019 (2 678 visits/day) ;the ratio of male to female patients was reversed from 1:1.37 in 2019 to 1.16:1 in 2020;the proportions of patients aged 0-6, 7-12, 13-17 and 18-45 years significantly decreased compared with those in 2019 (all P < 0.001), and the proportions of patients aged 46-69 and > 69 years significantly increased (both P < 0.001). During the COVID-19 epidemic, there were 171 types of skin diseases in the dermatology outpatient department, and the number of disease categories decreased compared with that during the same period in 2019 (442 types) ;the number of patient visits for allergic skin diseases, erythematous papulosquamous skin diseases, viral infectious skin diseases and bacterial infectious skin diseases significantly increased compared with that during the same period in 2019 (all P < 0.001), while the number of patient visits for sebaceous and sweat gland disorders, pigmented skin diseases and physical skin diseases significantly decreased (all P < 0.001). Conclusion(s): Compared with the same period in 2019, the number of outpatient visits, patient sex ratio, age distribution and disease types in the dermatology department have undergone marked changes during the COVID-19 epidemic, and this study provides a reference for healthcare workers in dermatology department to respond to various epidemics and natural disasters in the future.Copyright © 2021 by the Chinese Medical Association.

Contact allergy investigations in healthcare workers with face mask-related skin disease.

BACKGROUND: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the use of face masks has increased among healthcare workers (HCWs). Questionnaire studies have shown a high frequency of self-reported facial adverse skin reactions. Case reports have been published on face mask-induced allergic contact dermatitis and urticaria. OBJECTIVES: To describe the results of the contact allergy investigations in consecutive HCWs investigated for skin reactions to face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic and the results of the chemical investigations of face masks supplied by the hospital. METHODS: Participants were patch tested with baseline series and chemicals previously reported in face masks not included in the baseline series. Face mask(s) brought by the HCW were tested as is and/or in acetone extract. Chemical analyses were performed on nine different face masks for potential allergens. RESULTS: Fifty-eight HCWs were investigated. No contact allergies were found to the face mask(s) tested. Eczema was the most common type of skin reaction, followed by an acneiform reaction. Colophonium-related substances were found in one respirator and 2,6-di-t-butyl-4-methylphenol (BHT) were found in two respirators. CONCLUSION: Based on this report, contact allergies to face masks is uncommon. Patch test with colophonium-related substances and BHT should be considered when investigating adverse skin reactions to face masks.

Palmoplantar inflammation with a broad differential diagnosis made clear upon patch testing

A 51-year-old woman presented to our service with a 2-year history of severely painful, thickened skin of her bilateral hands and feet. She advised of considerable skin pain on mobilizing. She intermittently applied acrylate nails. This was on a background of chronic urticaria, asthma and allergic rhinitis. She described a positive family history of psoriasis. On examination, there was marked hyperkeratosis with welldemarcated erythema on the central palms and entire fingers with deep fissuring and scale. Similar finding were noted on the soles of the feet particularly affecting the heels, arch and also the tips of the toes. The morphology of the lesions favoured psoriasis, but the differential diagnosis included chronic hand dermatitis. She was referred for topical psoralen + ultraviolet A (PUVA) and patch testing to standard battery and acrylates. Treatment with topical PUVA was discontinued and patch testing lists were cancelled as a result of the emergence of COVID-19 in Ireland. Topical therapy of clobetasol propionate was initiated. On follow-up review, the appearances of her feet and hands had deteriorated significantly. She was commenced on acitretin 10 mg once daily, which was escalated to 20 mg 2 months later. Clinical improvement was noted, but appearances deteriorated once again following the application of acrylic nails. Further history revealed the patient had assisted with the application of acrylic nails to clients years prior to her initial review. Patch testing took place 18 months after initial review due to outpatient list cancellations secondary to the COVID-19 pandemic. Upon review 48 h after the application of the (METH) Acrylate Series, the patient was found to have a +2 reaction to 2- hydroxyethyl methacrylate and a further +2 reaction to 2- Hydroxypropyl methacrylate. At her 96-h review, both reaction sites were marked at +1. Following complete avoidance of acrylates, the palmoplantar inflammation entirely resolved. This case highlights the importance of a detailed clinical history where contact dermatitis is considered. In our patient's case, the clinical history and examination of the palmoplantar eruption combined with the first-degree family history of psoriasis were highly suggestive of a diagnosis of psoriasis. The episodic severe flares and its refractory nature to treatment raised suspicion for allergic contact dermatitis. Dermatologists should remain alert for potential contact allergens in cases of severe palmoplantar psoriasis. A further area for consideration is the deleterious effect the COVID-19 pandemic had on the successful diagnosis and treatment of dermatological patients through the cancellation of outpatient services.

Contact allergy to Efudix cream: a reminder and review

5-Fluorouracil (Efudix) cream is established as a topical treatment for superficial malignant and premalignant skin lesions. Its method of action involves the irreversible binding of the pyrimidine analogue fluorouracil to thymidylate synthetase within a cell. This prevents the incorporation of uracil into nuclear RNA, which destroys abnormal cancer cells (https://dermnetnz.org/topics/5-fluorouracil-cream). The expected sequelae of its use involves the development of a marked inflammatory response. We present a case of a severe, disproportionate reaction to Efudix cream, secondary to contact allergy to the excipients. A 61-year-old man attended the cutaneous allergy clinic with a history of severe, florid, inflammatory and ulcerative skin reactions affecting the lower limbs at sites of application of Efudix cream. This had been used as directed, to treat areas of Bowen disease, at intervals between December 2019 and February 2021. Contact allergy to Efudix cream was suspected and patch testing was performed to the British Standard and Cosmetic series, as well as the excipients of Efudix cream, including stearyl alcohol, propylene glycol (PG), methylparahydroxybenzoate, propylparahydroxybenzoate and white soft paraffin. While the patch tests were applied in the department on day 0, subsequent appointments on days 2, 4 and 7 were performed virtually with photographs as the patient developed COVID-19 symptoms, with positive lateral flow and polymerase chain reaction tests. He was patch test positive on days 4 and 7 to stearyl alcohol and propylene glycol, both being excipients of Efudix cream. A review of our database over a period of 17 years revealed 53 other cases with positive patch test to PG (n = 53/8000;0.66%), none of which were attributable to the use of Efudix cream, and only six cases of a positive patch test to stearyl alcohol (n = 6/8000;0.075%), of which one was attributable to the use of Efudix cream. Allergic contact dermatitis to Efudix cream and its excipients stearyl alcohol and propylene glycol is rare, although it has previously been described in the literature with the earliest reports in 1992, and the most recent being 15 years ago [Meijer B, de Waardvan der Spek F. Allergic contact dermatitis because of topical use of 5-fluorouracil (Efudix cream). Contact Dermatitis 2007;57: 58-60]. This case adds to the existing literature and is a reminder to clinicians that, although inflammation is expected with the use of Efudix cream, severe or disproportionate reactions should raise suspicion of possible contact allergy. Furthermore, this case highlights the challenges of patch testing in the current COVID-19 climate and highlights the importance of teledermatology as a novel option for assessment in cutaneous allergy services facing these conditions.

Popper's Dermatitis: A Unique Form of Contact Dermatitis In the MSM Community

Rationale: Men who have sex with men have different contact allergen exposures compared to men who have sex with women due to cultural differences in the LGBTQ+ community. Poppers, a common name for volatile alkyl nitrates, are used more frequently in the MSM community as recreational inhalants. We aimed to identify common anatomic sites and contact allergens associated with popper's dermatitis in the MSM community. Method(s): Covidence, Embase, MEDLINE, PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched to identify relevant articles studying allergic contact dermatitis associated with poppers in the MSM population. Search terms included 'allergic' or 'contact dermatitis' or 'patch testing' or "poppers" or 'Men who have sex with men'. Date, geographical or language restrictions were not used. No exclusion criteria was used. Result(s): : Common allergens associated with popper's dermatitis in the MSM community included amyl nitrate (N=7), isobutyl nitrate (N=3), isopropyl nitrate (N=2), and fragrance mix (N=5). Common anatomic sites included perioral regions (N=3), chest (N=2), nasal orifices (N=3), cheeks (N=5), penis (N=1), and lateral thigh (N=1). Conclusion(s): Sexual orientation is a relevant factor for dermatologists/allergists to consider, as the standard patch test series does not include common allergens associated with popper's dermatitis which disproportionally affects the MSM community. Our community needs to include gender and sexuality demographics when collecting patch test data.Copyright © 2022

Fragranced hand gels: beware the risk of contact allergy

An 11-year-old boy presented to the children's Emergency Department in Autumn 2020 with acute blistering of his palms. No other parts of the body or mucosal surfaces were involved. He was systemically well, with no significant past medical history except for eczema in early childhood. He had recently started back at school and was using hand gel regularly as part of precautions to reduce SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) transmission during the pandemic. There had been no other contact with chemicals, plants, crafting materials, glues, paints or homemade slime. Clinical photographs showed swelling and large bullae on the thenar eminence and lateral fingers. There was no erythema, nail involvement or significant scaling. The clinical diagnosis was acute pompholyx that was either irritant or allergic in origin. Testing to the standard series showed inconclusive results to some fragrances in the standard series. The patch testing to fragrance in the standard series was repeated and the fragrance series was added. The repeat test confirmed allergic contact dermatitis to fragrance with a positive to Myroxylon pereirae, linalool, limonene, sandalwood oil and majantol. The hand gels were found to contain linalool and limonene. To curb the spread of COVID-19, regular handwashing and the use of alcohol-based hand sanitizers/gels are part of everyday hygiene guidance for the general public. Therefore, the incidence of hand dermatitis is likely to rise. The World Health Organization and the Food and Drugs Administration advise that a minimum alcohol content of 60% is required to inactivate viral particles;however, it is also important to be aware that hand sanitizers/gels may also contain other constituents, including thickeners, humectants (e.g. propylene glycol) and fragrance. Research into the ingredients of 10 widely used hand sanitizers recently investigated by an independent watchdog for their alcohol content found that six had their ingredients listed online and five contained fragrance. The patient responded to topical treatment with a superpotent topical steroid cream (Dermovate) twice daily, white soft paraffin 50 : 50, an antiseptic emollient (Dermol 500) to wash the hands and allergen avoidance. We highlight to other dermatologists that contact allergy to fragrance or other components in hand sanitizer/gels may present acutely with pompholyx and to consider testing to the standard and fragrance series if this is suspected.

Occupational Skin Dermatitis among Healthcare Workers Associated with the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Review of the Literature.

The skin is the outermost layer of the human body and is continually exposed to numerous external stimuli, which can cause unwanted skin irritation. Occupational skin diseases are the most prevalent form of work-related illness and are found in a variety of sectors, particularly healthcare. During the recent COVID-19 pandemic, healthcare professionals experienced a variety of unexpected, unusual occupational skin diseases associated with COVID-19-engaged employment. Because the clinical characteristics of these types of skin inflammation are unique, this review focuses on the characteristics of a large category of occupational workers, namely COVID-19-engaged healthcare professionals. Furthermore, we examined the potential pathogeneses of occupational skin disorders associated with COVID-19-engaged labor, as well as different preventative methods.

A Folk Remedy for a Bellyache

Introduction: This case describes a curious cutaneous finding with a unique etiology from a cultural remedy. Case Description: A 19-month-old female was brought in by ambulance for an acutely progressive abdominal rash. Three days prior to presentation, she had a febrile seizure. The next day, she continued to have low grade temperatures and developed a faint red rash on the abdomen. On the day of presentation, the mother found a dark violaceous rash on the abdomen and called 911. The patient's presenting vital signs were unremarkable except for tachycardia to 133 and lower blood pressure for age of 86/67. She was tired and irritable. She had a large welldemarcated dusky and dark plaque with central denudation over the whole abdomen and right lateral back [Figures]. She was exquisitely tender to light palpation and guarding her abdomen. The remainder of her exam was unremarkable. Given the extent of her skin injuries, differential included intra-abdominal injury, intra-abdominal hemorrhage, burn or bruise from accidental and non-accidental cause, allergic dermatitis and disseminated intravascular coagulation in the setting of sepsis. Laboratory evaluation revealed mildly low hemoglobin for age at 10.5 g/dl with low MCV 74.2fL and a leukocytosis with WBC of 18.41 x10-3 πl with neutrophil predominance. Coagulation factors were normal. CMP revealed mild acidosis with CO2 of 17 mmol/L. Imaging studies included normal: CT head and CT abdomen with mild subcutaneous edema in the anterior abdomen near the umbilicus. Additional infectious studies were negative including nasal SARS-CoV-2 PCR, blood culture and urine culture. After the work-up, findings were consistent with a second-degree burn confirmed by Dermatology and Plastic Surgery. Suspected Child Abuse and Neglect team conducted additional social history with maternal grandmother because she is the caretaker when parents are at work, given parental denial of witnessing or causing the burn. Grandmother had limited English proficiency, so history was taken using a Medical Spanish interpreter. Grandmother explained that one day prior to presentation, she used an Oaxacan folk remedy to alleviate abdominal pain in which green tomato pulp was applied like a salve. Final diagnosis was second degree burn from phytophotodermatitis. Patient's skin improved with daily dressing changes and application of silver sulfadiazine, and she was discharged home to parents. Discussion: The use of tomato salve is a unique etiology of phytophotodermatitis that has not been well-characterized. Typical vegetation that causes burn injuries include figs, lemons and common wildflowers. Tomatillos or green tomatoes contain plant psoralens that can induce a strong phototoxic reaction to ultraviolet A radiation exposure after cutaneous contact. Conclusion: We present this case to highlight the importance of conducting thorough social history in the family's preferred language and to share a unique folk practice that can present as a severe burn and mimic child abuse.

Preservation of Personal Care and Cosmetic Products: Effectiveness and Safety During the COVID-19 Pandemic

The global beauty industry has been shocked by the COVID-19 pandemic. Currently, with increased hygiene habits, the choice of preservatives can be impacted by consumers opting for safe products. Products without preservation system could quickly become contaminated with mold, fungi, and bacteria, resulting in spoilage and increased risk of infection. This review explores the possible impacts of COVID-19 in the preservation of cosmetics from the perspective of effectiveness and safety. The preservatives included benzalkonium chloride, propylparaben, butylparaben, phenoxyethanol, sorbic acid, potassium sorbate, as well as the multifunctional/booster agents ethylhexylglycerin, caprylyl glycol, and natural antimicrobials. First, we highlight the current scenario of cosmetic preservation, the mode of action, and the maximum concentration allowed for preservatives;then examines overexposure to preservatives. Unexpectedly, the COVID-19 pandemic paralyzed the world market, and cosmetic industries had to adapt to a new reality. Due to the widespread use of cosmetic products, the prevalence of allergies, microbiological resistance, the need for proper prevention of product contamination, and concerns over the safety of preservatives, further investigations into the modes of action of traditional or alternative preservatives are needed to create successful safety products.

Allergic contact dermatitis caused by elastic bands from FFP2 mask

Background: A 29-year-old woman, with personal history of atopy, presented with face and neck dermatitis lasting 6 months. During the past year, she worked as a nurse in a COVID-19-dedicated ward. The dermatitis had developed since she started using FFP2 masks. She referred using three FFP2 masks, with similar symptoms: 3 M© 9320+, Halyard© Fluidshield N95 and PM 2.5©. She also mentioned history of contact-hypersensitivity reactions to metals, green clothes and leather shoes for several years. Physical examination exhibited erythematous plaques distributed along the contact area of the elastic bands of the FFP2 masks. Patch tests revealed delayed hypersensitivity to the elastic bands 3 M© 9320+ and PM 2.5© (++), mercapto mix (++), 2-mercaptobenzothiazole (MBT) (++), 2-(4-morpholinylmercapto)benzothiazol (MOR) (++), N-cyclohexyl-2-benzothiazolesulfenamide (++), textile dye mix Mx-30 (++), disperse yellow 3 (++), disperse blue 106 (+), potassium dichromate (+), cobalt dichloride (+) and nickel sulfate hexahydrate (+). A latex skin prick test was negative. Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) caused by elastic bands of FFP2 masks (3 M© 9320+ and PM 2.5 ©) was diagnosed. She was prescribed methylprednisolone aceponate 0.1% cream bid during five days and masks were changed to a type with cotton cloth bands, with resolution of the complaints. ACD to FFP2 masks components in health care workers can be severe, given the prolonged and continuous contact with the source of allergens. The rubber additives thiurams and dithiocarbamates are the main allergen groups involved in ACD to rubber bands in FFP2 masks. This seems to be the first report caused by mercaptobenzothiazole.

Contact dermatitis in healthcare workers: Results of patch testing and review of the literature

Aim: Occupational contact dermatitis (OCD) is common amongst healthcare workers (HCW). This retrospective study describes the causes of allergic contact dermatitis in HCW in New Zealand and reviews the current literature review on OCD in HCW during the COVID-19 pandemic. Material and Methods: All HCW undergoing patch testing between July 2008 and January 2020 at a public hospital patch-test clinic, and between June 2019 and January 2020 at a private dermatology clinic were included. Data collected included patient demographics, occupation, results of patch testing and pre and post-patch test diagnoses. Literature search was performed on Pubmed with keywords: healthcare workers, occupational, allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), irritant contact dermatitis (ICD), COVID-19. Results: Out of 837 patients patch tested during the study period, 67 were HCW. The mean age of HCW was 41 years (standard deviation 14) and 58 (87%) were female. The most common occupations were nurses (40%), allied health (22%) and doctors (18%). Forty-six (69%) patients had a background of atopic dermatitis. Hand dermatitis was the most common presentation (49%), followed by facial/neck dermatitis (25%). The most common relevant positive reactions were to rubber accelerators (24%), fragrances (16%), perservatives (15%) and topical steroids (9%). Literature review reflects that the incidence of ICD increased significantly due to increased frequency of hand washing and use of personal protective equipment during the COVID-19 pandemic. Contemporary data regarding ACD is limited. Conclusion: The most common allergens in HCW are rubber chemicals, fragrances and preservatives. The COVID- 19 pandemic has highlighted the incidence of OCD amongst HCWs. While rates of ICD have risen, data does not yet suggest increased rates of ACD.