Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

A comparative study between the two patch-test systems Finn chambers and Finn chambers AQUA

Luu, Henrik LU ; Mowitz, Martin LU ; Bruze, Magnus LU ; Engfeldt, Malin LU ; Isaksson, Marléne LU and Svedman, Cecilia LU (2021) In Contact Dermatitis 84(5). p.290-298
Abstract

Background: Finn Chambers AQUA (FCA) is a development of the Finn Chambers (FC) test system in which the test chambers are mounted on a moisture-resistant adhesive patch. FCA has pre-fixed filter papers. Because the use of FCA does not require any extra taping or use of separate filter papers, a change from FC to FCA chambers may be beneficial for both patients and patch-test technicians. Objectives: To investigate whether there are any differences regarding detection of contact allergy when simultaneous patch testing is performed with FC and FCA. Materials and Methods: Results from 434 dermatitis patients simultaneously tested with 10 allergens in both FC and FCA were evaluated. Results: There were no significant differences regarding... (More)

Background: Finn Chambers AQUA (FCA) is a development of the Finn Chambers (FC) test system in which the test chambers are mounted on a moisture-resistant adhesive patch. FCA has pre-fixed filter papers. Because the use of FCA does not require any extra taping or use of separate filter papers, a change from FC to FCA chambers may be beneficial for both patients and patch-test technicians. Objectives: To investigate whether there are any differences regarding detection of contact allergy when simultaneous patch testing is performed with FC and FCA. Materials and Methods: Results from 434 dermatitis patients simultaneously tested with 10 allergens in both FC and FCA were evaluated. Results: There were no significant differences regarding detection of positive reactions between the two test systems. There were significantly more doubtful reactions to methylisothiazolinone, fragrance mix I and hydroperoxides of linalool when testing with FCA. We only observed significantly more doubtful reactions in FC regarding nickel(II)sulfate. Irritant reactions to formaldehyde were also significantly more common when using FCA. Conclusion: The FC and FCA had good agreement in detection of positive reactions. However, the results including doubtful and irritant reactions justify further research regarding optimization of the dose.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; ; and
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
keywords
Finn chambers, Finn chambers AQUA, patch testing, patch-test system
in
Contact Dermatitis
volume
84
issue
5
pages
290 - 298
publisher
Wiley-Blackwell
external identifiers
  • scopus:85099902705
  • pmid:33368411
ISSN
0105-1873
DOI
10.1111/cod.13766
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
983c7379-10ab-4a63-9d07-25a01a23ce19
date added to LUP
2021-02-10 11:18:42
date last changed
2024-06-27 08:30:10
@article{983c7379-10ab-4a63-9d07-25a01a23ce19,
  abstract     = {{<p>Background: Finn Chambers AQUA (FCA) is a development of the Finn Chambers (FC) test system in which the test chambers are mounted on a moisture-resistant adhesive patch. FCA has pre-fixed filter papers. Because the use of FCA does not require any extra taping or use of separate filter papers, a change from FC to FCA chambers may be beneficial for both patients and patch-test technicians. Objectives: To investigate whether there are any differences regarding detection of contact allergy when simultaneous patch testing is performed with FC and FCA. Materials and Methods: Results from 434 dermatitis patients simultaneously tested with 10 allergens in both FC and FCA were evaluated. Results: There were no significant differences regarding detection of positive reactions between the two test systems. There were significantly more doubtful reactions to methylisothiazolinone, fragrance mix I and hydroperoxides of linalool when testing with FCA. We only observed significantly more doubtful reactions in FC regarding nickel(II)sulfate. Irritant reactions to formaldehyde were also significantly more common when using FCA. Conclusion: The FC and FCA had good agreement in detection of positive reactions. However, the results including doubtful and irritant reactions justify further research regarding optimization of the dose.</p>}},
  author       = {{Luu, Henrik and Mowitz, Martin and Bruze, Magnus and Engfeldt, Malin and Isaksson, Marléne and Svedman, Cecilia}},
  issn         = {{0105-1873}},
  keywords     = {{Finn chambers; Finn chambers AQUA; patch testing; patch-test system}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  number       = {{5}},
  pages        = {{290--298}},
  publisher    = {{Wiley-Blackwell}},
  series       = {{Contact Dermatitis}},
  title        = {{A comparative study between the two patch-test systems Finn chambers and Finn chambers AQUA}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cod.13766}},
  doi          = {{10.1111/cod.13766}},
  volume       = {{84}},
  year         = {{2021}},
}