Systemically induced contact dermatitis from dental rosin.
ABSTRACT Rosin is a ubiquitous contact sensitizer which may be present in dental materials such as periodontal dressings, impression materials, cements, and cavity varnishes When a hypersensitive person is exposed to a sensitizer, allergic contact dermatitis/stomatitis may develop, most commonly after direct skin/mucosa contact with the sensitizer. However, widespread dermatitis may develop after systemic administration of the sensitizer, and this paper reports the case of a rosin-hypersensitive man who developed widespread eczematous dermatitis after dental treatment with a rosin-containing product.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Oral mucous membrane contact dermatitis (or contact stomatitis) is relatively rare. In general, the mucosa is more resistant to primary irritants, and is not as readily sensitized as the skin. The oral mucosa is also constantly bathed in saliva, which washes sensitizers from the mucosal surface and prevents adequate contact. Furthermore, abundant mucosal vasculature allows for rapid absorption and clearing of allergens. Nevertheless, contact reactions can occur on the oral mucous membrane. Contact sensitivity has been described as a factor in recurrent oral ulceration43 and 32 and oral lichenoid reactions.52 As with other types of contact dermatitis, allergic contact dermatitis may be difficult to distinguish from irritant contact dermatitis, and it may also mimic oral changes of vitamin deficiency, certain anemias, uremic stomatitis, and candidiasis.18 Although the prevalence of allergic contact sensitivity in the mouth is unknown, a number of substances have been reported to cause oral symptoms.Immunology and Allergy Clinics of North America - IMMUNOL ALLERGY CLIN N AMER. 01/1997; 17(3):471-485.
- Contact Dermatitis 12/1999; 41(6):342-3. · 2.93 Impact Factor
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present controlled study was to investigate a possible relationship between contact allergies to potential allergens and oral lichen lesions. METHODS: Eighty-three patients with oral lichen lesions (OLL) and control groups of age- and gender-matched dermatitis patients (DP, n = 83) and patch-tested dermatitis patients randomly selected from files (PSFF, n = 319) were included in the study. OLL and DP groups were patch-tested epicutaneously and examined intraorally. RESULTS: The frequencies of contact allergy to mercury and carvone were statistically higher in the OLL group than in the DP group. Surfaces of amalgam and composite restorations were statistically more frequent in the OLL group compared to the DP group. Contact allergy to nickel and colophony, the latter with a statistically significant difference, was more common in the DP group. The numerical difference found for nickel allergy was, however, not significant comparing the OLL and PSFF groups. CONCLUSION: Contact allergy to mercury was overrepresented in patients with OLL and has been reported in previous studies, but the present finding of an overrepresentation of contact allergy to carvone in patients with oral lichen lesions has not been reported previously. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Carvone, in addition to mercury and gold, as previously suggested, can be one of the causative or maintenant factors for oral lichen lesions. Carvone-hypersensitive patients with oral lichen lesions should therefore avoid carvone-containing products for oral use.Clinical Oral Investigations 03/2013; · 2.20 Impact Factor