Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://accedacris.ulpgc.es/jspui/handle/10553/154581
Title: Anogenital Contact Dermatitis in Spain: A REIDAC Study of Patients Undergoing Patch Testing in 2019-2024
Authors: Grau Pérez, Mercé 
Mercader-Garcia, Pedro
Gimenez-Arnau, Ana Maria
Sanz-Sanchez, Tatiana
Ninet, Violeta Zaragoza
Guijarro, Susana Cordoba
Miquel, Francisco Javier Miquel
Salvador, Juan Francisco Silvestre
Gonzalez-Perez, Ricardo
Gonzalez, Inmaculada Ruiz
Baldrich, Esther Serra
Carrascosa, Jose Manuel
de Frutos, Francisco Javier Ortiz
Serna, Mercedes Rodriguez
Ortega, Maria Elena Gatica
Suarez, Carmen Paredes
Trivino, Francisco Jose Navarro
Chicharro, Pablo
Andreu, Marta
Gilo, Araceli Sanchez
Rodriguez, Jose Juan Pereyra
Nieto, Maria Antonia Pastor
Mele-Ninot, Gemma
Guillen, Paloma Sanchez-pedreno
de la Fuente, Enrique Gomez
Elosua-Gonzalez, Marta
Munera-Campos, Monica
Romero, Fatima Tous
Descalzo, Miguel Angel
Borrego Hernando, Leopoldo 
UNESCO Clasification: 32 Ciencias médicas
320106 Dermatología
Keywords: Sensitization
Propolis
Hygiene
Allergic Contact Dermatitis
Allergy, et al
Issue Date: 2025
Journal: Contact Dermatitis 
Abstract: Background: The REIDAC (Spanish Registry for Research in Contact Dermatitis) conducts nationwide epidemiological surveillance of contact dermatitis in Spain. Anogenital involvement within REIDAC has not been previously studied. Objectives: To describe the most common diagnoses and update relevant allergens in patients with anogenital lesions referred for patch testing. Methods: We analysed patients who underwent patch testing within REIDAC from 2019 to 2024. Patients were classified into three groups: (G1) exclusively anogenital lesions, (G2) no anogenital involvement and (G3) both anogenital and non-anogenital lesions. Sensitisation and relevance were assessed. Results: Among 18 291 patients, 116 (0.6%) had exclusively anogenital lesions, 17 576 (96.1%) had no anogenital involvement and 599 (3.3%) had both. G1 patients were more likely to have at least one positive reaction (91.4%), a current relevant reaction (53.4%, diagnosed with allergic contact dermatitis, ACD) and to be polysensitised compared to other groups (p < 0.001). 14.5% of anogenital ACD identified cases were not identified by the Spanish baseline series. Fragrances, preservatives, topical anaesthetics and steroids were the leading relevant allergens. Benzisothiazolinone, sodium metabisulfite and propolis emerged as new sensitisers. Conclusion: ACD was highly prevalent among patients with anogenital lesions referred for patch testing. The threshold for patch testing in these patients may need reconsideration.
URI: https://accedacris.ulpgc.es/jspui/handle/10553/154581
ISSN: 0105-1873
DOI: 10.1111/cod.70048
Source: Contact Dermatitis[ISSN 0105-1873], (2025)
Appears in Collections:Artículos
Adobe PDF (336,92 kB)
Show full item record

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Share



Export metadata



Items in accedaCRIS are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.