Welcome to CDC Stacks | Concentrations and stability of methyl methacrylate, glutaraldehyde, formaldehyde and nickel sulfate in commercial patch test allergen preparations - 36379 | CDC Public Access
Stacks Logo
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.
 
 
Help
Clear All Simple Search
Advanced Search
Concentrations and stability of methyl methacrylate, glutaraldehyde, formaldehyde and nickel sulfate in commercial patch test allergen preparations
Filetype[PDF - 350.64 KB]


Details:
  • Pubmed ID:
    24731086
  • Pubmed Central ID:
    PMC4629838
  • Funding:
    CC999999/Intramural CDC HHS/United States
  • Document Type:
  • Collection(s):
  • Description:
    Background

    Epicutaneous patch tests are used to reproduce allergy and diagnose allergic contact dermatitis. Reliable allergen test preparations are required.

    Objectives

    The purpose of the present study was to measure the actual concentrations of nickel(II) sulfate hexahydrate (NiSO4), methyl methacrylate, formaldehyde, and glutaraldehyde, and to compare them with the labelled concentrations, in commercial patch test allergen preparations found in dermatology clinics where patch testing is routinely performed.

    Materials and methods

    The commercial in-date and out-of-date patch test allergen preparations concentrations of NiSO4, methyl methacrylate, formaldehyde and glutaraldehyde from one to three participating clinics were analysed with chromatographic or wet chemical techniques.

    Results

    NiSO4 and formaldehyde concentrations were at or above the labelled concentrations; however, formaldehyde loss occurred with storage. NiSO4 particulate was uniformly distributed throughout the petrolatum. ‘In-use’ methyl methacrylate reagent syringes all contained ≤ 56% of the 2% label concentration, with no observable relationship with expiration date. Lower methyl methacrylate cocentrations were consistently measured at the syringe tip end, suggesting loss resulting from methyl methacrylate’s volatility. The concentrations of glutaraldehyde patch test allergen preparations ranged from 27% to 45% of the labelled (1% in pet.) concentration, independently of expiration date.

    Conclusions

    Some false-negative methyl methacrylate, formaldehyde or glutaraldehyde patch test results may be attributable to instability of the test preparations.