SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

References

  • 1
    Jadassohn J. Zur Kenntnis der medica-mentösen Dermatosen. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft, 5. Kongreß, Graz, 1895. Braumüller, Wien 1896; 10329.
  • 2
    Nethercott JR. Practical problems in the use of patch testing in the evaluation of patients with contact dermatitis. Curr Probl Dermatol 1990; 2: 97123.
  • 3
    Bourke J, Coulson I, English J. Guidelines for the management of contact dermatitis: an update. Br J Dermatol 2009; 160: 94654.
  • 4
    Rajagopalan R, Anderson RT, Sarma S, Kallal J, Retchin C Jones J, Fowler JF, Jr., Sherertz EF. An economic evaluation of patch testing in the diagnosis and management of allergic contact dermatitis. Am J Contact Dermat 1998; 9: 14954.
  • 5
    Kadyk DL, McCarter K, Achen F, Belsito DV. Quality of life in patients with allergic contact dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol 2003; 49: 103748.
  • 6
    Wilkinson DS, Fregert S, Magnusson B, Bandmann HJ, Calnan CD, Cronin E, Hjorth N, Maibach HI, Malten KE, Meneghini CL, Pirilä V. Terminology of Contact Dermatitis: From the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1970; 50: 28792.
  • 7
    Fregert S, Bandmann HJ. Patch Testing, 1. Auflage, Springer-Verlag, New York , Heidelberg , Berlin , 1975.
  • 8
    Lindberg M, Matura M. Patch testing. In: Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Lepoittevin JP: Contact Dermatitis. 5. Auflage. Heidelberg , Dordrecht , London , New York : Springer-Verlag, 2011: 43964.
  • 9
    Schnuch A, Aberer W, Agathos M, Brasch J, Frosch PJ, Fuchs T, Richter G, für die Deutsche Kontaktallergie-Gruppe. Leitlinien der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft (DDG) zur Durchführung des Epikutantests mit Kontaktallergenen. Hautarzt 2001; 52: 8646.
  • 10
    Schnuch A, Aberer W, Agathos M, Becker D, Brasch J, Elsner P, Frosch PJ, Fuchs T, Geier J, Hillen U, Löffler H, Mahler V, Richter G, Szliska C, für die Deutsche Kontaktallergie-Gruppe. Durchführung des Epikutantests mit Kontaktallergenen. Leitlinien der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft (DDG) und der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Allergie und klinische Immunologie (DGAKI). J Dtsch Der-matol Ges 2008; 6: 7705.
  • 11
    Brasch J, Fartasch M. Standardization in Contact Dermatitis – a highly desirable aim. Contact Dermatitis 2009; 60: 3512.
  • 12
    Worm M, Aberer W, Agathos M, Becker D, Brasch J, Fuchs T, Hillen U, Hoger P, Mahler V, Schnuch A, Szliska C. Epikutantestung bei Kindern – Empfehlungen der Deutschen Kontaktallergiegruppe (DKG). J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 2007; 5: 1079.
  • 13
    Shuster S. Patch-test sensitivity and reproducibility in individuals and populations. Am J Contact Dermat 1992; 3: 748.
  • 14
    Belsito DV, Storrs FJ, Taylor JS, Marks Jr JG, Adams RM, Rietschel RL, Jordan W P, Emmett EA. Reproducibility of Patch Tests: A United States Multicenter Study. Am J Contact Der-mat 1992; 3: 193200.
  • 15
    Memon AA, Friedmann PS. Studies on the reproducibility of allergic contact dermatitis. Br J Dermatol 1996; 134: 20814.
  • 16
    Gollhausen R, Przybilla B, Ring J. Reproducibility of patch tests. J Am Acad Dermatol 1989; 21: 1196202.
  • 17
    Lindelöf B. A left versus right side comparative study of Finn Chamber patch tests in 220 consecutive patients. Contact Dermatitis 1990; 22: 2889.
  • 18
    Brasch J, Henseler T, Aberer W, Bäuerle G, Frosch PJ, Fuchs T, Fünfstück V, Kaiser G, Lischka GG, Pilz B, Sauer C, Schaller J, Scheuer B, Szliska C. Reproducibility of patch tests: A multicenter study of synchronous left- versus right-sided patch tests by the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group. J Am Acad Dermatol 1994; 31: 58491.
  • 19
    Bourke JF, Batta K, Prais L, Abdullah A, Foulds IS. The reproducibility of patch tests. Br J Dermatol 1999; 140: 1025.
  • 20
    Meneghini CL, Angelini G. Behaviour of contact allergy and new sensitivities on subsequent patch tests. Contact Dermatitis 1977; 3: 13842.
  • 21
    Dooms-Goossens A, Degreef H, Parijs M, Maertens M. A retrospective study of patch test results from 163 patients with stasis dermatitis or leg ulcers. II. Retesting of 50 patients. Dermatologica 1979; 159: 2318.
  • 22
    Bandmann HJ, Agathos M. New results and some remarks to the “Angry Back Syndrome”. Contact Dermatitis 1981; 7: 236.
  • 23
    Bandmann HJ, Agathos M. Das „Angry Back-Syndrom“– Untersuchungsergebnisse mit Sequenztestungen, Wiederho-lungstestungen und dem Cocarden-(Target-)Test. Hautarzt 1981; 32: 97104.
  • 24
    Keczkes K, Basheer AM, Wyatt EH. The persistence of allergic contact sensitivity: a 10-year follow-up in 100 patients. Br J Dermatol 1982; 107: 4615.
  • 25
    Fischer T, Rystedt I. False-positive, follicular and irritant patch test reactions to metal salts. Contact Dermatitis 1985; 12: 938.
  • 26
    Prott FJ. Zur Beweiskraft epikutaner Tests. Dt Derm 1986; 34: 12930.
  • 27
    Nethercott J, Holness DL. The positive predictive value of patch tests in the evaluation of patients with suspected contact dermatitis. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am 1989; 9: 54954.
  • 28
    Nethercott JR, Holness DL. Validity of patch test screening trays in the evaluation of patients with allergic contact dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol 1989; 21: 568.
  • 29
    Diepgen TL, Coenraads PJ. Sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value of patch testing: the more you test, the more you get? Contact Dermatitis 2000; 42: 3157.
  • 30
    Uter W, Schnuch A, Gefeller O. Guidelines for the descriptive presentation and statistical analysis of contact allergy data. Contact Dermatitis 2004; 51: 4756.
  • 31
    Frosch PJ, Pirker C, Rastogi SC, Andersen KE, Bruze M, Svedman C, Goossens A, White IR, Uter W, Arnau EG, Lepoittevin JP, Menné T, Johansen JD. Patch testing with a new fragrance mix detects additional patients sensitive to perfumes and missed by the current fragrance mix. Contact Dermatitis 2005; 52: 20715.
  • 32
    Brasch J, Henseler T. The reaction index: a parameter to assess the quality of patch test preparations. Contact Dermatitis 1992; 27: 2034.
  • 33
    Geier J, Uter W, Lessmann H, Schnuch A. The positivity ratio – another parameter to assess the diagnostic quality of a patch test preparation. Contact Dermatitis 2003; 48: 2802.
  • 34
    Brasch J, Geier J, Henseler T. Evaluation of patch test results by use of the reaction index. An analysis of data recorded by the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK). Contact Dermatitis 1995; 33: 37580.
  • 35
    Warshaw EM, Nelsen DD, Sasseville D, Belsito DV, Maibach HI, Zug KA, Fowler JF, Jr., Taylor JS, DeLeo VA, Marks JG, Jr., Storrs FJ, Mathias CG, Pratt MD, Rietschel RL. Positivity ratio and reaction index: patch-test quality-control metrics applied to the north american contact dermatitis group database. Dermatitis 2010; 21: 917.
  • 36
    Löffler H, Becker D, Brasch J, Geier J. Simultaneous sodium lauryl sulphate testing improves the diagnostic validity of allergic patch tests. Results from a prospective multicentre study of the German Contact Dermatitis Research Group (Deutsche Kontaktallergie-Gruppe, DKG). Br J Dermatol 2005; 152: 70919.
  • 37
    Anderson WA, Shatin H, Canizares O. Influence of varying physical factors on patch test responses. J Invest Dermatol 1958; 30: 7782.
  • 38
    Stauffer H. Die Ekzemproben. Methodik und Ergebnisse. Arch Dermatol Syph 1930; 162: 51776.
  • 39
    Haxthausen H. Über die Anwendung der Elektrophorese beim Studium der allergischen ekzematösen Reaktion. Schweiz Med Wochenschr 1947; 77: 11501.
  • 40
    Novák M. Iontophoretic patch test in allergic contact dermatitis: 30 years’ experience. Dermatology 1997; 195: 303.
  • 41
    Brasch J, Hüttemann M, Proksch E. Iontophoresis of nickel elicits a delayed cutaneous response in sensitized individuals that is similar to an allergic patch test reaction. Contact Dermatitis 2000; 42: 3641.
  • 42
    Spier H W, Natzel R. Chromatallergie und Zementekzem. Gewerbedermatologischer und analytischer Beitrag. Hautarzt 1953; 4: 635.
  • 43
    Spier HW, Sixt I. Untersuchungen über die Abhängigkeit des Ausfalles der Ekzem-Läppchenproben von der Hornschichtdicke. Quantitativer Abriß-Epikutantest. Hautarzt 1955; 6: 1529.
  • 44
    Maucher OM, Klaschka F. Tesafilm-abrißmethode: Empfindlichkeitssteige-rung von Epikutantests. Hautarzt 1985; 36: 250.
  • 45
    Fernström AIB. Patch-test studies: 1. A new patch test technique. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1954; 34: 20315.
  • 46
    Rajka E. Allgemeine Diagnostik der allergischen Krankheiten – Methoden zum Nachweis von Antigenen (Allergenen) und Antikörpern (Reaginen). In: Rajka E: Allergie und allergische Erkrankungen. Band 1: Allgemeiner Teil. Budapest : Akadémiai Kiadó, 1959: 47396.
  • 47
    Hornstein O P, Kienlein-Kletschka BM. Improvement of patch test allergen exposure by short-term local pressure. Dermatologica 1982; 165: 60711.
  • 48
    Burckhardt W, Schmid R. Die Epicutanprobe durch wiederholte Benetzung. Ein neuer Test zur Prüfung der Empfindlichkeit der Haut auf Wasch- und Lösungsmittel. Hautarzt 1964; 15: 5556.
  • 49
    Hannuksela M, Lahti A. Immediate reactions to fruits and vegetables. Contact Dermatitis 1977; 3: 7984.
  • 50
    Osterballe M, Scheller R, Stahl Skov P, Andersen KE, Bindslev-Jensen C. Diagnostic value of scratch-chamber test, skin prick test, histamine release and specific IgE in birch-allergic patients with oral allergy syndrome to apple. Allergy 2003; 58: 9503.
  • 51
    Bindslev-Jensen C. Skin tests for immediate hypersensitivity. In: Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Lepoittevin JP: Contact Dermatitis. 5. Auflage. Heidelberg , Dordrecht , London , New York : Springer-Verlag, 2011: 5117.
  • 52
    Hannuksela M, Salo H. The repeated open application test (ROAT). Contact Dermatitis 1986; 14: 2217.
  • 53
    Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Menné T. Allergic contact dermatitis in humans: experimental and quantitative aspects. In: Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Lepoittevin JP: Contact Dermatitis. 5. Auflage. Heidelberg , Dordrecht , London , New York : Springer-Verlag, 2011: 24151.
  • 54
    Seidenari S. Reactivity to nickel sulfate at sodium lauryl sulfate pretreated skin sites is higher in atopics: an echographic evaluation by means of image analysis performed on 20 MHz B-scan recordings. Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1994; 74: 2459.
  • 55
    Seidenari S, Motolese A, Belletti B. Pre-treatment of nickel test areas with sodium lauryl sulfate detects nickel sensitivity in subjects reacting negatively to routinely performed patch tests. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 34: 8892.
  • 56
    Agner T, Johansen JD, Overgaard L, Volund A, Basketter D, Menné T. Combined effects of irritants and allergens. Synergistic effects of nickel and sodium lauryl sulfate in nickel-sensitized individuals. Contact Dermatitis 2002; 47: 216.
  • 57
    Pedersen LK, Haslund P, Johansen JD, Held E, Volund A, Agner T. Influence of a detergent on skin response to me-thyldibromo glutaronitrile in sensitized individuals. Contact Dermatitis 2004; 50: 15.
  • 58
    Kvorning SA, Svendsen IB. A synthetic detergent as a provocative agent in patch tests. J Invest Dermatol 1956; 26: 4216.
  • 59
    Jacques SL, McAuliffe DJ, Blank IH, Parrish JA. Controlled removal of human stratum corneum by pulsed laser. J Invest Dermatol 1987; 88: 8893.
  • 60
    Veremis-Ley M, Ramirez H, Baron E, Hanneman K, Lankerani L, Scull H, Cooper KD, Nedorost ST. Laser-assisted penetration of allergens for patch testing. Dermatitis 2006; 17: 1522.
  • 61
    Koch P. Allergic contact dermatitis due to timolol and levobunolol in eyedrops, with no cross-sensitivity to other ophthalmic beta-blockers. Contact Dermatitis 1995; 33: 1401.
  • 62
    Oldhoff JM, Bihari IC, Knol EF, Bruijnzeel-Koomen CAFM, de Bruin-Weller MS. Atopy patch test in patients with atopic eczema/dermatitis syndrome: comparison of petrolatum and aqueous solution as a vehicle. Allergy 2004; 59: 4516.
  • 63
    Trautmann A. Heparinallergie: Spätty-pallergie gegen subkutane Heparininjektion. Allergo J 2006; 15: 5016.
  • 64
    Lachapelle JM, Maibach HI. Patch Testing and Prick Testing – A Practical Guide (Official Publication of the ICDRG), 2. Auflage, Springer-Verlag, Berlin , Heidelberg , 2009.
  • 65
    Wolf J. Die innere Struktur der Zellen des Stratum desquamans der menschlichen Epidermis. Z mikrosk anat Forsch 1939; 46: 170202.
  • 66
    Dickel H, Bruckner TM, Erdmann SM, Fluhr JW, Frosch PJ, Grabbe J, Löffler H, Merk HF, Pirker C, Schwanitz HJ, Weisshaar E, Brasch J. The “strip” patch test: results of a multicentre study towards a standardization. Arch Dermatol Res 2004; 296: 2129.
  • 67
    Dickel H, Kamphowe J, Geier J, Altmeyer P, Kuss O. Strip patch test vs. conventional patch test: investigation of dose-dependent test sensitivities in nickel- and chromium-sensitive subjects. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2009; 23: 101825.
  • 68
    Friedmann PS. The relationships between exposure dose and response in induction and elicitation of contact hy-persensitivity in humans. Br J Dermatol 2007; 157: 1093102.
  • 69
    Dickel H, Goulioumis A, Gambichler T, Fluhr JW, Kamphowe J, Altmeyer P, Kuss O. Standardized tape stripping: a practical and reproducible protocol to uniformly reduce the stratum corneum. Skin Pharmacol Physiol 2010; 23: 25965.
  • 70
    Nickoloff BJ, Naidu Y. Perturbation of epidermal barrier function correlates with initiation of cytokine cascade in human skin. J Am Acad Dermatol 1994; 30: 53546.
  • 71
    Dickel H, Gambichler T, Kamphowe J, Altmeyer P, Skrygan M. Standardized tape stripping prior to patch testing induces upregulation of Hsp90, Hsp70, IL-33, TNF-a and IL-8/CXCL8 mRNA: new insights into the involvement of ‘alarmins’. Contact Dermatitis 2010; 63: 21522.
  • 72
    Lonsdorf AS, Enk AH. Immunologie des allergischen Kontaktekzems. Hautarzt 2009; 60: 3241.
  • 73
    Effendy I, Maibach HI. Cytokines and irritant dermatitis. In: Chew AL, Maibach HI: Irritant Dermatitis. Berlin , Heidelberg , New York : Springer-Verlag, 2006: 36174.
  • 74
    Dickel H, Kreft B, Kuss O, Worm M, Soost S, Brasch J, Pfiitzner W, Grabbe J, Angelova-Fischer I, Eisner P, Fluhr J, Altmeyer P, Geier J. Increased sensitivity of patch testing by standardized tape stripping beforehand: a multicenter diagnostic accuracy study. Contact Dermatitis 2010; 62: 294302.
  • 75
    Fleming CJ, Burden AD, Forsyth A. Accuracy of questions related to allergic contact dermatitis. Am J Contact Der-mat 2000; 11: 21821.
  • 76
    Aberer W, Andersen KE, White IR. Should patch testing be restricted to dermatologists only? Contact Dermatitis 1993; 28: 12.
  • 77
    Nakada T, Hostynek JJ, Maibach HI. Use tests: ROAT (repeated open application test)/PUT (provocative use test): an overview. Contact Dermatitis 2000; 43: 13.
  • 78
    Aberer W Wollwachsalkohole (Lanolin alcohol) — ein kontroversielles Kontaktallergen. Dermatol Beruf Umwelt 2006; 54: 1359.
  • 79
    Dickel H, Scola N, Altmeyer P. Der Abriss-Epikutantest — Indikation in der Berufsdermatologie anhand eines Fall-beispiels. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 2009; 11: 9657.
  • 80
    Scola N, Hunzelmann N, Ruzicka T, Kobus S, Adamek E, Altmeyer P, Dickel H. Positive Testreaktionen im Abrissepikutantest bei negativem Standardepikutantest. Bedeutung für die berufsdermatologische Begutachtung. Hautarzt 2010; 61: 105660.
  • 81
    Veien NK, Kaaber K. Nickel, cobalt and chromium sensitivity in patients with pompholyx (dyshidrotic eczema). Contact Dermatitis 1979; 5: 3714.
  • 82
    Trautmann A. Delayed-type heparin hypersensitivity: subcutaneous allergy and intravenous tolerance. Asthma Allergy Immunol 2009; 7: 14753.
  • 83
    Brasch J. Mundschleimhaut und Kontaktallergie. Allergo J 2004; 13: 1917.
  • 84
    Trautmann A. Allergiediagnose – Allergietherapie, 1. Auflage, Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart , New York , 2006.
  • 85
    Schneider W. Diskussionsäußerungen, Fragen aus dem Leserkreise, Anfrage Nr. 2: „Prognostische, diagnostische und gutachtliche Bedeutung von Hauttesten in der Gewerbemedizin. Ich denke dabei vor allem an lipoid-lösliche Substanzen.“, 2. Stellungnahme. Der-matologische Gutachten – Beiträge zur Praxis der Berufsdermatosen 1952; 1: 1546.
  • 86
    Spier H W. Allgemeine Gesichtspunkte zur Begutachtung von Gewerbedermatosen. Berufsdermatosen 1954; 2: 1949.
  • 87
    Brehler R, Merk H. In-vitro-Tests zum Nachweis von Kontaktallergien. Hautarzt 2005; 56: 11413.
  • 88
    Traidl-Hoffmann C, Ring J. Is there an in vitro test for type IV allergy discriminating between sensitization and allergic disease? Clin Exp Allergy 2008; 38: 14125.
  • 89
    Dickel H, Kuss O, Kamphowe J, Altmeyer P, Höxtermann S. Association of CD69 up-regulation on CD4+ CLA+ T cells versus patch test, strip patch test and clinical history in nickel sensitization. Eur J Med Res 2010; 15: 3038.
  • 90
    Moed H, Boorsma DM, Stoof TJ, von Blomberg BME, Bruynzeel DP, Scheper RJ, Gibbs S, Rustemeyer T. Nickel-responding T cells are CD4+ CLA+ CD45R0+ and express chemokine receptors CXCR3, CCR4 and CCR10. Br J Dermatol 2004; 151: 3241.