40 CONTACT DERMATrFlS IN A CANADIAN AIRCRAFT FACTORY D. Sassetille MD. Royal Victoria Hospital, Montr&l, QC, CANADA

Obiective: To analvze the oatterns and trends of contact dermatitis in the workforce of a large aircraft manufacturer.

Methods: between 1990 and 1997. 25 workers from Bombardier Aeronau- tical Didsion were assessed for occupational dermatitis. Patch tests were per- formed with the European Standard series and wth a Glues & Adhesives e.eries. 20 workers were also tested to additional series (antimicrobials, rubber, coo- ling oils) and to sealants, phenalic and epoxy resins used in the workplace. All non-standard allergens were tested on 5 controls to exclude irritant concen- tratfons. Tests were read at day 4, and. in one case, also after 20 minutes.

Results: Most workers were part-fitters or sealers. They were exposed to sheet metal, sdvents, primer paints and anticorrosion basecoats, epoxy-based adheswes and phenol-formaldehyde sealants. Many of these products also con- tain chromates. Lesions were mostly on hands but often extended to forearms and sometimes to face, neck and trunk. 12 cares of allergic contact dermatitis were discovered, 2 of them with an airborne component. 5 workers had rele- vant reactions to epoxy resin and 2 reacted to amine hardeners. Reactions to products used in the w&place occured in 9 cases, 4 of tiich had no other sew sitlzatlon. Concomitant allergy to chromates was found in 4 cases. One worker had contact urticaria from epoxy resin and reactive dlluents.

Condusian: 4 cases of allergic contact dermatitis would have been mtssed with the Standard and the Wues & Adhesives series alone. Epoxy and phenol- formaldehyde resins are the commonest sensitizers. Co-se&i&n to chro- mates, as already pointed out by Handley and Burrows is also frequent.

References: 1. Sassetille 0. Contact Dermatitis 8” a Canadian aircraft factory. People and Work - Research reoolts 18. 1998:129. 2. Sassetille D. Contact urticaria from epoxy resin and reactive diluents. Contact Denatitis 1998:38:57-58. 3. Rudzki E, Krajewska D. Goss-react!ons between ethylenediamine, diethyl- enetriamine and triethyienetetramine. Contact Dermatitis 1976:2;31 l-31 3. 4. Handley J, Burrow D. Dernvtitis from hexavalent chromate in the acce- lerator of an epoxy sealant (PR1422) used in the aircraft industry. Contact Dermatitis 1994:30;193-196.

41

CONTACT ALLERGY TO TOPICAL CORTICOSTEROIDS IN ISRAELI PATIENR

S WeltfrIend*, B Marcus-Farber and R. Friedman-Brnbaum Department ofDermatology, Rambam MedIcal Center, TechmowInsmute ofTechnology, Haifa, Israel

ObJeCtlVe S”,ce topical uxtlcosterolds are ~“Creaslngly recognnlred a> relatwely common contact se”s”zers, the Incidence of this sensawy was studled in 057 lsraeh patw~ts

Methods Patients attending the contact dermatms chmc during 1995. 1998 were Included I” the study Cortlcosterold se~les (Chemotechmque Diagnostics) were added to our standard serzs The patch tests were read at days 2 and 4 ReactIons were scored as recommended by the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group

Results 13 patwts representmg 1.98% ylelded posawe reaction to one or more comcosterad preparation We found cortxosterads to Ix the eighth most frequent allergen after mckel sulfate (13 85%), potass~m dlchromate (9 13%), thlmerosal (4 4l%), cobalt chloride (3 35%), fragrance nux (3 35%), balsam of per” (3 2%) and thluram mlx(3 7%) Most common allergens detected were tixocortol p~valate (4 patrats), hydrocortisone-l7-butyrate (4 patlents), betamethasone I 7 valerate (4 patlents) and clobetasol I7 proplonate (3 patlents) 5 patx”ts reacted to more than one sterold simultaneously, but the patterns of cross-reaction were not always consistent with those prewousl> reported

Conclusions The results amongst our patients confirms the need for screening for steroid allergy as a part of standard patch-tesrlng However, m this study no smgle steroid of the steroid series would have been useful for screening