19302065 2009 05 07 2009 07 15

1365-2133 160 5 2009 May Br. J. Dermatol. Guidelines for the management of contact dermatitis: an update. 946-54 These guidelines for management of contact dermatitis have been prepared for dermatologists on behalf of the British Association of Dermatologists. They present evidence-based guidance for investigation and treatment, with identification of the strength of evidence available at the time of preparation of the guidelines, including details of relevant epidemiological aspects, diagnosis and investigation. Department of Dermatology, South Infirmary, Victoria Hospital, Cork, Ireland. Bourke J J Coulson I I English J J British Association of Dermatologists Therapy Guidelines and Audit Subcommittee eng Journal Article Practice Guideline 2009 03 19

England Br J Dermatol 0004041 IM Dermatitis, Contact diagnosis epidemiology therapy Evidence-Based Medicine Great Britain Humans Patch Tests methods Prognosis Societies, Medical Bell H K HK Eedy D J DJ Mitchell D M DM Bull R H RH Tidman M J MJ Fuller L C LC Yesudian P D PD Joseph D D Wagle S S 2009 3 19 2009 3 24 9 0 2009 3 24 9 0 2009 7 16 9 0 ppublish BJD9106 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2009.09106.x 19302065 19480192 2009 06 01 2009 06 19

0029-6570 23 34 2009 Apr 29-May 5 Contact dermatitis: types, triggers and treatment strategies. 40-6 This article provides an overview of the issues involved in the assessment and management of patients presenting with contact dermatitis. It describes the different types of contact dermatitis, outlines possible triggers and highlights treatment strategies. Dermatology Department, Queen's Medical Centre, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottingham. Sandra.lawton@nuh.nhs.uk Lawton S S Gill M M eng Journal Article

England Nurs Stand 9012906 N Dermatitis, Contact classification diagnosis etiology therapy Environmental Exposure Humans Occupational Exposure 2009 6 2 9 0 2009 6 2 9 0 2009 6 20 9 0 ppublish 19480192 19397620 2009 04 28

1600-0536 60 5 2009 May Contact Derm. Contact allergy in chronic leg ulcers: results of a multicentre study carried out in 423 patients and proposal for an updated series of patch tests. 279-87 BACKGROUND: There is a lack of prospective studies investigating contact sensitization in patients with chronic leg ulcers. OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency of contact sensitization in patients with chronic leg ulcers using a special series of patch tests and to determine whether the number of sensitizations was correlated with the duration of the chronic leg ulcers. PATIENTS/METHODS: Multicentre study carried out in patients with chronic leg ulcers; patch tests with the European baseline series and with an additional 34 individual allergens or mixes and 3 commercial products. RESULTS: Of the 423 patients (301 women, 122 men, mean age 68.5 years) with chronic leg ulcers, 308 (73%) had at least one positive patch test with 3.65 positive patch tests per patient. The main allergens were Myroxylon pereirae (41%), fragrance mix I (26.5%), antiseptics (20%), and corticosteroids (8%). The number of positive tests per patient was not correlated with the cause of ulcer but was increased with the duration of the ulcer with a statistical difference between the group of the <1 year compared with the group >10 years duration. CONCLUSIONS: From this large prospective multicentre study, polysensitization is frequent in patients with chronic leg ulcers, increasing with the duration of the ulcer. We propose avoidance of topical antiseptics and ointments containing perfumes in patients with chronic leg ulcers and an updated patch test series for investigating these patients. Dermatology Department, Fournier Hospital, University Hospital of Nancy, Nancy, France. a.barbaud@chu-nancy.fr Barbaud Annick A Collet Evelyne E Le Coz Christophe J CJ Meaume Sylvie S Gillois Pierre P eng Journal Article Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Denmark Contact Dermatitis 7604950 IM 2009 4 29 9 0 2009 4 29 9 0 2009 4 29 9 0 ppublish COD1541 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2009.01541.x 19397620 14728695 2004 01 19 2004 06 10 2005 11 16

1396-0296 17 Suppl 1 2004 Cleansing without compromise: the impact of cleansers on the skin barrier and the technology of mild cleansing. 16-25 Cleanser technology has come a long way from merely cleansing to providing mildness and moisturizing benefits as well. It is known that harsh surfactants in cleansers can cause damage to skin proteins and lipids, leading to after-wash tightness, dryness, barrier damage, irritation, and even itch. In order for cleansers to provide skin-care benefits, they first must minimize surfactant damage to skin proteins and lipids. Secondly, they must deposit and deliver beneficial agents such as occlusives, skin lipids, and humectants under wash conditions to improve skin hydration, as well as mechanical and visual properties. While all surfactants tend to interact to some degree with lipids, their interaction with proteins can vary significantly, depending upon the nature of their functional head group. In vitro, ex vivo, and in vivo studies have shown that surfactants that cause significant skin irritation interact strongly with skin proteins. Based on this understanding, several surfactants and surfactant mixtures have been identified as "less irritating" mild surfactants because of their diminished interactions with skin proteins. Surfactants that interact minimally with both skin lipids and proteins are especially mild. Another factor that can aggravate surfactant-induced dryness and irritation is the pH of the cleanser. The present authors' recent studies demonstrate that high pH (pH 10) solutions, even in the absence of surfactants, can increase stratum corneum (SC) swelling and alter lipid rigidity, thereby suggesting that cleansers with neutral or acidic pH, close to SC-normal pH 5.5, may be potentially less damaging to the skin. Mildness enhancers and moisturizing agents such as lipids, occlusives, and humectants minimize damaging interactions between surfactants, and skin proteins and lipids, and thereby, reduce skin damage. In addition, these agents play an ameliorative role, replenishing the skin lipids lost during the wash period. The present review discusses the benefits of such agents and their respective roles in improving the overall health of the skin barrier. Unilever Research and Development, 45 River Road, Edgewater, NJ 07020, USA. kp.ananth@unilever.com Ananthapadmanabhan K P KP Moore David J DJ Subramanyan Kumar K Misra Manoj M Meyer F F eng Journal Article Review

Denmark Dermatol Ther 9700070 0 Detergents 0 Surface-Active Agents IM Detergents therapeutic use Humans Hydrogen-Ion Concentration Skin Care methods Skin Diseases drug therapy Surface-Active Agents therapeutic use Water Loss, Insensible physiology 40 2004 1 20 5 0 2004 6 21 10 0 2004 1 20 5 0 ppublish 14728695 04S1002 14728696 2004 01 19 2004 06 10 2007 11 15

1396-0296 17 Suppl 1 2004 Role of mild cleansing in the management of patient skin. 26-34 Routine everyday care of skin is an essential part of optimal patient management. Common problems such as xerosis, dermatitis, eczema, psoriasis, acne, rosacea, and photodamage leave the skin vulnerable to external insults, partly as a result of varying levels of barrier dysfunction. Cosmetic surgery procedures also typically damage the stratum corneum (SC) and leave skin with a very weak barrier during recovery phase. Cleansing is an important aspect of any skin care, since it not only removes unwanted dirt, soil, and bacteria from skin, but also removes dead surface cells, preparing skin to better absorb topically applied drugs/medication. Care must be taken to minimize any further weakening of the SC barrier during cleansing. Cleansers based on mild synthetic surfactants and/or emollients that cause minimal barrier perturbation are ideal for these patients. The present paper is a brief review of four clinical trials that evaluated the efficacy and compatibility of either mild syndet bars or cleansers in patients with atopic dermatitis, acne, rosacea, or patients who had received chemical peels or Retin-A(R) (tretinoin) treatment for sustained photodamage. Unilever Global Skin Innovation Center, 40 Merritt Boulevard, Trumbull, Connecticut 06611, USA. kumar.subramanyan@unilever.com Subramanyan Kumar K eng Journal Article Review

Denmark Dermatol Ther 9700070 0 Detergents 0 Hydroxy Acids 0 Surface-Active Agents 302-79-4 Tretinoin IM Acne Vulgaris drug therapy Clinical Trials as Topic Dermatitis, Atopic drug therapy Detergents therapeutic use Humans Hydroxy Acids therapeutic use Rosacea drug therapy Severity of Illness Index Skin Care methods Skin Diseases drug therapy Surface-Active Agents therapeutic use Tretinoin therapeutic use 26 2004 1 20 5 0 2004 6 21 10 0 2004 1 20 5 0 ppublish 14728696 04S1003 8322298 1993 08 03 1993 08 03 2008 07 16

0029-2001 113 14 1993 May 30 Tidsskr. Nor. Laegeforen. [Diaper dermatitis. Classification, occurrence, causes, prevention and treatment] 1712-5 Diaper dermatitis is a multifactorial dermatological disorder characterized by inflammation in the diaper area. About half of all babies and old people in need of care experience light dermatitis, while 20% have moderate and 5% severe dermatitis. Friction from the diaper, occlusion, irritation from faeces, ammonia, detergents, candida albicans, proteolytic and lipolytic enzymes and moisture deposited on the epidermis cause damage at the stratum corneum layer of the epidermis. Diaper dermatitis is caused by a combination of mostly irritant effects. Compounds that infiltrate the skin can aggravate the reaction to the damaged epidermis. The barrier function of epidermis must be restored in order to prevent and treat diaper dermatitis. Medisinsk avdeling, Fylkessjukehuset i Haugesund. Langøen A A Vik H H Nyfors A A nor English Abstract Journal Article Review Bleiedermatitt. Klassifikasjon, forekomst, årsaker, forebygging og behandling.

NORWAY Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen 0413423 IM Aged Diaper Rash classification epidemiology etiology therapy Humans Incontinence Pads Infant Norway epidemiology 37 1993 5 30 1993 5 30 0 1 1993 5 30 0 0 ppublish 8322298