Advertisement

Patch Testing: A Historical and Current Perspective

  • Jean-Marie LachapelleEmail author
Chapter

Abstract

This introductory chapter is devoted to the patch test technique and its progressive improvements over the years. The patch test is the first dermatological application following the birth of experimental medicine initiated by Claude Bernard. The technique has survived as an essential tool of diagnosis in contact dermato-allergology, and many improvements have been accomplished in recent years and are summarized in this chapter. Today this technique has many additional tools of investigation; consequently, it is an area that continues to grow.

References

  1. 1.
    Bernard CL. Introduction à l’étude de la médecine expérimentale. Réédition Paris. Paris: Nouvel Office d’Edition; 1963. 371 p.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jadassohn J. Zur Kenntnis der medikamentösen Dermatosen. Verhandlungen der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft, Fünfter Congress, Graz, 1895. Wien und Leipzig: Wilhelm Braumüller; 1896. p. 103–90.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lachapelle J-M. Giant steps in patch testing: a historical memoir. Phoenix: Smart-Practice; 2010. 169 p.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Huber B. 100 years of allergy: Clemens von Pirquet… his idea of allergy and his immanent concept of disease. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2006;118:573–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Huber B. 100 years of allergy: Clemens von Pirquet… his idea of allergy and his immanent concept of disease, 2: The Pirquet concept of allergy. Wien Klin Wochenschr. 2006;118:718–27.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bloch B. Experimentelle Studien über das Wesen der Jodoformidiosynkrasie. Z Exp Pathol Ther. 1911;9:509–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bloch B, Karrer P. Chemische und biologische Untersuchungen über die Primelidiosynkrasie. Beibl Vierteljahrsschr Naturforsch Gesell Zürich. 1927;72:1–25.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sulzberger MB. Three lessons learned in Bloch’s clinic. Am J Dermatopathol. 1980;2:321–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bonnevie P. Aetiologie und Pathogenese der Ekzemkrankheiten. Klinische Studien über due Ursachen der Ekzeme unter besonderer Berücksichtigung des Diagnostischen Wertes der Ekzemproben. Copenhagen/Barth, Leipzig: Busch; 1939.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Marcussen PV. Variations in the incidence of contact hypersensitivities. Trans St Johns Hosp Dermatol Soc. 1962;48:40–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sézary A. La pratique des tests épicutanés. Bull Soc Franç Derm Syph. 1935;42:78–83. Bull Soc Franç Derm Syph. 1936;43:641, 1463, 1805. Bull Soc Franç Derm Syph. 1938;45:928, 1872.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jadassohn W. A propos des tests épicutanés “dirigés” dans l’eczéma professionnel. Praxis. 1951;40:50–1.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Foussereau J, Benezra C. Les eczémas allergiques professionnels. Paris: Masson; 1970. 507 p.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Calnan CD, Fregert S, Magnusson B. The International Contact Dermatitis Research Group. Cutis. 1976;18:708–10.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Wilkinson DS, Fregert S, Magnusson B, Bandmann HJ, Calnan CD, Cronin E, et al. Terminology of contact dermatitis. Acta Derm Venereol. 1970;50:287.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lachapelle J-M, Maibach HI. Patch testing and prick testing: a practical guide. Official publication of the ICDRG. 3rd ed. Berlin: Springer; 2012. 218 p.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Magnusson B, et al. Standardization of routine patch testing. Report I.Proc Northern Dermatol Soc. Acta Derm Venereol. 1962;42:126–7.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Magnusson B, Fregert S, Hjorth N, Hovding G, Pirilä V, Skog E. Routine patch testing. V. Correlations of reactions to the site of dermatitis and the history of the patient. Acta Derm Venereol (Stock). 1969;49:556–63.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hannuksela M, Salo H. The repeated open application test (ROAT). Contact Dermatitis. 1986;14:221–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hannuksela M. Sensitivity of various skin sites in the repeated open application test. Am J Contact Dermatitis. 1991;2:102–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hannuksela A, Niimäki A, Hannuksela M. Size of the test area does not affect the result of the repeated open application test. Contact Dermatitis. 1993;28:299–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Lachapelle JM, Ale SI, Freeman S, Frosch PJ, Goh CL, Hannuksela M, et al. Proposal for a revised international standard series of patch tests. Contact Dermatitis. 1997;36:121–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Alikhan A, Cheng LS, Ale I, Andersen KE, Bruze M, Eun HC, et al. Revised minimal baseline series of the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group: evidence-based approach. Dermatitis. 2011;22:121–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ale SI, Maibach HI. Clinical relevance in allergic contact dermatitis. Dermatosen. 1995;43:119–21.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lachapelle JM. A proposed relevance scoring system for positive allergic patch test reactions: practical implications and limitations. Contact Dermatitis. 1997;36:39–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Bruze M, Isaksson M, Gruvberger B, Frick-Engfeldt M. Recommendation of appropriate amounts of petrolatum preparation to be applied at patch testing. Contact Dermatitis. 2007;56:281–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Isaksson M, Gruvberger B, Frick- Engfeldt M, Bruze M. Which test chambers should be used for acetone, ethanol and water solutions when patch testing? Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57:134–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Maibach HI. The ESS-excited skin syndrome (alias the “angry back”). In: Ring J, Burg G, editors. New trends in allergy. Berlin: Springer; 1981. p. 208–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Mitchell JC, Maibach HI. The angry back syndrome – the excited skin syndrome. Semin Dermatol. 1982;1:9.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Bruynzeel DP, Maibach HI. Excited skin syndrome (angry back). Arch Dermatol. 1986;122:323–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Andersen KE. The allergen bank: the idea behind it and the preliminary results with it. Curr Probl Dermatol. 1995;22:1–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Andersen KE, Rastogi SC, Carlsen L. The allergen bank: a source of extra contact allergens for the dermatologist in practice. Acta Derm Venereol. 1996;76:136–40.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Barbaud A, Gonçalo M, Bruynzeel D, Bircher A. Guidelines for performing skin tests with drugs in the investigation of cutaneous adverse drug reactions. Contact Dermatitis. 2001;45:321–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Barbaud A. Place of drug skin tests. In: Pirchler WJ, editor. Drug hypersensitivity. Basel: Karger; 2007. p. 366–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Barbaud A. Skin testing in delayed reactions to drugs. Immunol Allergy Clin North Am. 2009;29:517–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Gonçalo M, Bruynzeel D. Patch testing in adverse drug reactions. In: Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Lepoittevin J-P, editors. Contact dermatitis. 5th ed. Berlin: Springer; 2011. p. 475–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Bruze M, Trulsson L, Bendsöe N. Patch testing with ultrasonic bath extracts. Am J Contact Dermat. 1992;3:133–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Goossens A. Minimizing the risks of missing a contact allergy. Dermatology. 2001;202:186–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Goossens A. Alternatives aux patch-tests. Ann Dermatol Venereol. 2009;136:623–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Johansen JD, Bruze M, Andersen KE, Frosch PJ, Dreier B, White IR, et al. The repeated open application test: suggestions for a scale of evaluation. Contact Dermatitis. 1998;39:95–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Fischer T, Maibach HI. The thin layer rapid use epicutaneous test (TRUE-Test), a new patch test method with high accuracy. Br J Dermatol. 1985;112:63–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Fischer T, Maibach HI. Easier patch testing with TRUE Test. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1989;20:447–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Lachapelle J-M, Maibach HI. True test system. Chapter 6. In: Lachapelle J-M, Maibach HI, editors. Patch testing and prick testing: a practical guide. Official publication of the ICDRG. 3rd ed. Berlin: Springer; 2012. p. 103–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of DermatologyCatholic University of Louvain, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-LucBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations