Adhesives and Glues

Reference work entry

Abstract

Exposure to adhesives and glues is common in occupation, leisure time, and household activities. There is a constantly growing group of occupational glues in which the adhesive is a polymerization product formed by a complex chemical reaction between the macromolecules.

Phenol-formaldehyde resins have occupational relevance for shoemakers, in car manufacturing, in the wood industries, and in construction industries.

Epoxy resins, used in a wide range of industries, penetrate regular gloves and may cause aerogenic contact dermatitis.

While acrylic adhesives are less sensitizing than epoxy and colophony rosin, acrylates present with cross-reactions among each other, but not between methacrylates and cyanoacrylates.

Colophony rosin is a natural material and also used in many occupational fields.

Glues should be tested epicutaneously either using commercial patch-test substances or as is, but only after having completely dried in order to minimize the risk of active sensitization via patch testing.

Keywords

Contact Dermatitis Formaldehyde Resin Ethylene Glycol Dimethacrylate Abietic Acid Active Sensitization 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Aalto-Korte K, Alanko A, Kuuliala O, Jolanki J (2008) Occupational methacrylate and acrylate allergy from glues. Contact Dermatitis 58:340–346PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aalto-Korte K, Jungewelter S et al (2009) Contact allergy to epoxy methacrylates. Contact Dermatitis 61:9–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Angelini E, Marinaro C, Carrozzo AM et al (1993) Allergic contact dermatitis of the lip margins from para-tertiary-butylphenol in a lip liner. Contact Dermatitis 28:146–148PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Belsito DV (1987) Contact dermatitis to ethyl-cyanoacrylate-containing glue. Contact Dermatitis 17:234–236PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bruze M, Bjoerkner B, Lepoittevin JP (1995) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from ethyl cyanoacrylate. Contact Dermatitis 32:156–159PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De Groot AC, Bruynzeel DP, Bos JD et al (1988) The allergens in cosmetics. Arch Dermatol 124:1525–1529PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Elms J, Fishwick D, Robinson E, Burge S, Huggins V, Barber C, Williams N, Curran A (2005) Specific IgE to colophony? Occup Med (Lond) 55(3):234–237CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Fowler JF, Skinner SM, Belsito DV (1992) Allergic contact dermatitis from formaldehyde resins in permanent press clothing: an under diagnosed cause of generalized dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol 27:962–968PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Freeman S (1997) Shoe dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 36:247–251PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Fregert S, Orsmark K (1984) Allergic contact dermatitis due to epoxy resin in textile labels. Contact Dermatitis 11:131–132PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Gambichler T, Boms S, Freitag M (2004) Contact dermatitis and other skin conditions in instrumental musicians. BMC Dermatol 4:3PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Geldof BA, Roesyanto ID, van Joost T (1989) Clinical aspects of para-tertiary butylphenol formaldehyde resin (PTBP-FR) allergy. Contact Dermatitis 21:312–315PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Guin JD (1995) Colophony (rosin). In: Practical contact dermatitis. McGraw-Hill, New York, pp 115–124Google Scholar
  14. Guin JD, Baas K, Nelson-Adesokan P (1998) Contact sensitization to cyanoacrylate adhesive as a cause of severe onychodystrophy. Int J Dermatol 37:31–36PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Hausen BM, Kulenkamp D (1998) Allergische kontaktdermatitis auf einem hydrokolloidverband bei kolophoniumallergikern. Aktuel Dermatol 24:174–177Google Scholar
  16. Hausen BM, Milbrodt M, Koenig WA (1995) The allergens of nail polish. Contact Dermatitis 33:157–164PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Holness DL, Nethercott JR (1989) Occupational contact dermatitis due to epoxy resin in a fiberglass binder. J Occup Med 31:87–89PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Jones K, Garfit SJ, Calverley A, Channa K, Cocker J (2001) Identification of a possible biomarker for colophony exposure. Occup Med (Lond) 51(8):507–509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Jordan WP (1975) Cross-sensitization patterns in acrylate allergies. Contact Dermatitis 1:13–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kanerva L, Alanko K (1999) Allergic contact dermatitis from 2-hydroxy methacrylate in an adhesive of an electrosurgical grounding plate. Eur J Dermatol (in press)Google Scholar
  21. Kanerva L, Estlander T (2000) Allergic onycholysis and paronychia caused by cyanoacrylate nail glue, but not by photobonded methacrylate nails. Eur J Dermatol 10(3):223–225PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. Kanerva L, Jolanki R, Leino T, Estlander T (1995) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis from 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate and ethylene glycol dimethacrylate in a modified acrylic structural adhesive. Contact Dermatitis 33:84–89PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kiec-Swierczynska M, Krecisz B, Swiercynska-Machura D, Zaremba J (2005) An epidemic of occupational contact dermatitis from an acrylic glue. Contact Dermatitis 52(3):121–125PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kober BJ, Scheule AM, Voth V, Deschner N, Schmid E, Ziemer G (2008) Anaphylactic reaction after systemic application of aprotinin triggered by aprotinin-containing fibrin sealant. Anaesth Analg 107(2):406–409CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kopferschmidt-Kubler MC, Stenger R, Blaumeiser M et al (1996) Rev Mal Respir 13:305–307Google Scholar
  26. Lachapelle JM, Leroy B (1990) Allergic contact dermatitis to colophony included in the formulation of flexible collodion BP, the vehicle of a salicylic and lactic acid wart paint. Dermatol Clin 8:143–146PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Lazarov A (2007) Sensitization to acrylates is a common adverse reaction to artificial fingernails. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 21:169–174PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lombardi C, Botello M, Caruso A, Passalacqua G (2003) Allergy and skin diseases in musicians. Eur Ann Allergy Clin Immunol 35(2):52–55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. Malten KE (1984) Dermatological problems with synthetic resins and plastics in glues, part I. Dermatosen 32:81–86Google Scholar
  30. Manusco G, Reggiani M, Berdondini RM (1996) Occupational dermatitis in shoemakers. Contact Dermatitis 34:17–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ockenfels HM, Seemann U, Goos M (1995) Allergy to fibrin tissue in dental medicine. Contact Dermatitis 32:363–364PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Quirce S (2004) Eosinophilic bronchitis in the workplace. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 4(2):87–91PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Richter G (1974) Zur epidemiologie des epoxidharzekzems. Dermatol Monatsschr 160:785–789PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. Sadhra S, Foulds IS, Gray CN et al (1997) Colophony uses, health effects, airborne measurement and analysis. Ann Occup Hyg 38:385–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Sainio E-L, Engstroem K, Henriks-Eckerman M-L, Kanerva L (1997) Allergenic ingredients in nail polishes. Contact Dermatitis 37:155–162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Sasseville D, Tennstedt D, Lachapelle JM (1997) Allergic contact dermatitis from hydrocolloid dressings. Am J Contact Dermat 8:236–238PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Savonius B, Keskinen H, Tuppurainen M, Kanerva L (1993) Occupational respiratory disease caused by acrylics. Clin Exp Allergy 23:416–424PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Schnuch A, Szliska C, Uter W (2009) Facial allergic contact dermatitis. Data from the IVDK and review of literature. Hautarzt 60:13–21PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schubert H, Agatha G (1979) Zur Allergennatur der para-tert. Butylphenolformaldehydharze. Dermatosen 27:49–52Google Scholar
  40. Shirai T, Shimota H, Chida K, Sano S, Takeuchi Y, Yasueda H (2005) Anaphylaxis to aprotinin in fibrin sealant. Intern Med 44(10):1088–1089PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Sripaiboonkij P et al (2009) Respiratory and skin health among glass microfiber production workers: a cross sectional study. Environ Health 8:36PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Steen VD (1999) Occupational scleroderma. Curr Opin Rheumatol 11(6):490–494PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tarvainen K (1995) Analysis of patients with allergic patch test reactions to a plastics and glue series. Contact Dermatitis 32:346–351PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Tosti A, Guerra L, Vincenzi C, Peluso AM (1993) Occupational skin hazards from synthetic plastics. Toxicol Ind Health 9:493–502PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. van Putten PB, Coenraads PJ, Nater J (1984) Hand dermatoses and contact allergic reactions in construction workers exposed to epoxy resins. Contact Dermatitis 10:146–150PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wuethrich B, Bianchi Kusch E, Johansson SG (1996) Allergic urticaria and angioedema caused by a hemostatic sponge of bovine fibrin used in tooth extraction. Allergy 51:49–51Google Scholar
  47. Yamakage A, Ishikawa H, Saito Y, Hattori A (1980) Occupational scleroderma-like disorder occurring in men engaged in the polymerization of epoxy resins. Dermatologica 161:33–44PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jana Präßler
    • 1
  • Matthias Gebhardt
    • 2
  • Peter Elsner
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Dermatology and AllergologyFriedrich Schiller UniversityJenaGermany
  2. 2.Department of DermatologyUniversity Hospital JenaJenaGermany

Personalised recommendations