Suppr超能文献

焦亚硫酸钠过敏很常见,但它有实际影响吗?

Sodium metabisulfite allergy is common but is it relevant?

作者信息

Madan Vishal, Walker Stephen L, Beck Michael H

机构信息

Contact Dermatitis Investigation Unit, University of Manchester, School of Medicine, Hope Hospital, Manchester, UK.

出版信息

Contact Dermatitis. 2007 Sep;57(3):173-6. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01188.x.

Abstract

Positive patch tests to sodium metabisulfite (SMB) are frequent. Standard series patch testing to SMB in 1751 patients showed 71 reactions interpreted as positive and allergic. 33 (46.5%) reactions were originally reported as relevant and 38 (53.5%) were of unexplained relevance depending on the presence or absence of identifiable sources responsible for the presenting dermatitis. A breakdown of these findings is presented. An additional detailed study of the sources of SMB in the environment and a retrospective analysis of these results have been undertaken to identify further, possibly overlooked sources of SMB exposure based on the occupational and recreational history. Most of the positive reactions in the relevant group were attributed to the use of Trimovate cream (63%). 5 patients (13%) with positive reactions in the unexplained relevance group were potentially exposed to SMB in local anaesthetic solutions while at work. 3 patients in the unexplained relevance group (7.8%) and 4 (12.1%) in the relevant group had potential for occupational exposure to SMB as bakers or caterers. Overall, occupational exposure was considered as a possible source of sensitization in 10 (26.3%) patients in the unexplained relevance group. We propose that sensitization to SMB from parenteral solutions and occupational exposure from food handling may account for some of the otherwise unexplained positive patch test reactions. A detailed occupational history should be therefore be sought in otherwise unexplained positive reactions to SMB. We also propose that it is worthwhile including SMB in our standard series in the UK.

摘要

对偏亚硫酸氢钠(SMB)的斑贴试验阳性很常见。对1751例患者进行的标准系列SMB斑贴试验显示,有71例反应被判定为阳性且为过敏反应。根据是否存在导致当前皮炎的可识别来源,33例(46.5%)反应最初被报告为相关反应,38例(53.5%)反应的相关性不明。现将这些结果进行分类阐述。我们还对环境中SMB的来源进行了进一步详细研究,并对这些结果进行了回顾性分析,以根据职业和娱乐史确定其他可能被忽视的SMB暴露来源。在相关组中,大多数阳性反应归因于使用了曲安奈德益康唑乳膏(63%)。在相关性不明组中,有5例(13%)阳性反应患者在工作时可能接触了局部麻醉溶液中的SMB。相关性不明组中有3例患者(7.8%)以及相关组中有4例患者(12.1%)有作为面包师或餐饮服务商职业接触SMB的可能。总体而言,相关性不明组中有10例患者(26.3%)的致敏可能来源被认为是职业暴露。我们认为,对肠胃外溶液中SMB的致敏以及食品处理过程中的职业暴露可能是一些其他原因不明的斑贴试验阳性反应的原因。因此,对于原因不明的SMB阳性反应,应详细询问职业史。我们还建议在英国的标准系列试验中纳入SMB是值得的。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验