Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39652964›Full record

ArticleDermatology practical & conceptual2024

Differential Diagnosis of Irritant Versus Allergic Contact Dermatitis Based on Noninvasive Methods.

Panagiota Gkagkari, Anna Tagka, Alexandros Stratigos, Vangelis Karalis, Aikaterini Kyritsi, Andreas Vitsos, Michail Christou Rallis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Dermatology practical & conceptual, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Panagiota GkagkariSection of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Anna TagkaFirst Department of Dermatology-Venereology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Andreas Syggros Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Alexandros StratigosFirst Department of Dermatology-Venereology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Andreas Syggros Hospital, Athens, Greece.
Vangelis KaralisSection of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Aikaterini KyritsiSection of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Andreas VitsosSection of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Michail Christou RallisSection of Pharmaceutical Technology, Department of Pharmacy, School of Health Sciences, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIrritant contact dermatitis (ICD) is characterized by direct injury to the epidermal cells, activating the innate immune response. Allergic contact dermatitis (ACD), in contrast, is delineated by a delayed hypersensitivity reaction of type IV. Despite the distinct etiopathogenic mechanisms under-pinning each condition, the differentiation between them presents a significant diagnostic challenge.

objectiveThis study aimed to determine whether a combination of clinical evaluation and noninvasive measurements-encompassing oxidative stress, erythema, hydration, melanin content, transepidermal water loss (TEWL), hemoglobin concentration, and skin texture and volume-could distinguish ICD from ACD.

methodsTwo cohorts, each comprising 21 patients, were evaluated: one diagnosed with ICD and the other with ACD. All participants underwent biophysical and clinical assessments, along with Antera

resultsICD prompted an almost immediate inflammatory reaction (peaking at 24 hours), whereas ACD incited a delayed response (72 hours). Noninvasive evaluated parameters such as hemoglobin concentration, skin texture and volume, melanin content, erythema, and TEWL showed significant differences between the ICD and ACD cohorts (P < 0.05). The allergens amcinonide, nickel sulphate, cobalt chloride, budesonide, PPD, and thiuram mix were found to induce elevated levels of oxidative stress.

conclusionsThe evaluation of patients with noninvasive parameters, including transepidermal water loss (TEWL), hemoglobin concentration, and skin texture and volume, could markedly aid in distinguishing irritant contact dermatitis from allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Nevertheless, the study was constrained by a limited sample size.

Identifiers

PMID39652964
PMCPMC11619931

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.