ArticleJournal of synchrotron radiation2022
Chemical characterization of inks in skin reactions to tattoo.
Article in Journal of synchrotron radiation, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Tattoo Ink Exposure and Its Potential Link with Lymphoma and Skin Cancer: A Narrative Review of New Evidence.Cardiovascular & hematological disorders drug targets · 2026Review
- Investigation on Tattoo Ink (Hexadecachlorinate Copper Phthalocyanine) Removal: Novel Chemical and Biological Approach.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Epidural analgesia and tattoos: a modified technique to minimise risks and improve safety.BMJ case reports · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Skin reactions are well described complications of tattooing, usually provoked by red inks. Chemical characterizations of these inks are usually based on limited subjects and techniques. This study aimed to determine the organic and inorganic composition of inks using X-ray fluorescence spectroscopy (XRF), X-ray absorption spectroscopy (XANES) and Raman spectroscopy, in a cohort of patients with cutaneous hypersensitivity reactions to tattoo. A retrospective multicenter study was performed, including 15 patients diagnosed with skin reactions to tattoos. Almost half of these patients developed skin reactions on black inks. XRF identified known allergenic metals - titanium, chromium, manganese, nickel and copper - in almost all cases. XANES spectroscopy distinguished zinc and iron present in ink from these elements in endogenous biomolecules. Raman spectroscopy showed the presence of both reported (azo pigments, quinacridone) and unreported (carbon black, phtalocyanine) putative organic sensitizer compounds, and also defined the phase in which Ti was engaged. To the best of the authors' knowledge, this paper reports the largest cohort of skin hypersensitivity reactions analyzed by multiple complementary techniques. With almost half the patients presenting skin reaction on black tattoo, the study suggests that black modern inks should also be considered to provoke skin reactions, probably because of the common association of carbon black with potential allergenic metals within these inks. Analysis of more skin reactions to tattoos is needed to identify the relevant chemical compounds and help render tattoo ink composition safer.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.