Allergic contact dermatitis caused by 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate and ethyl cyanoacrylate contained in cosmetic glues among hairdressers and beauticians who perform nail treatments and eyelash extension as well as hair extension applications: A systematic review
| Autor: | Cara Symanzik, Patricia Weinert, Željka Babić, Sarah Hallmann, Martin S. Havmose, Jeanne D. Johansen, Sanja Kezic, Marija Macan, Jelena Macan, Julia Strahwald, Rajka Turk, Henk F. Molen, Swen M. John, Wolfgang Uter |
|---|---|
| Rok vydání: | 2022 |
| Předmět: |
HEMA
Dermatology contact dermatitis Cosmetics ethyl cyanoacrylate skin diseases Dermatitis Occupational occupational diseases 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate Dermatitis Allergic Contact Immunology and Allergy Humans Methacrylates occupational ddc:610 Cyanoacrylates glue 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate contact dermatitis ECA ethyl cyanoacrylate glue hairdresser HEMA occupational occupational diseases skin diseases ECA hairdresser Hair |
| Zdroj: | Symanzik, C, Weinert, P, Babić, Ž, Hallmann, S, Havmose, M S, Johansen, J D, Kezic, S, Macan, M, Macan, J, Strahwald, J, Turk, R, van der Molen, H F, John, S M & Uter, W 2022, ' Allergic contact dermatitis caused by 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate and ethyl cyanoacrylate contained in cosmetic glues among hairdressers and beauticians who perform nail treatments and eyelash extension as well as hair extension applications : A systematic review ', Contact Dermatitis, vol. 86, no. 6, pp. 480-492 . https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.14056 |
| ISSN: | 1600-0536 |
| DOI: | 10.1111/cod.14056 |
| Popis: | Current cosmetic regulations primarily focus on protecting consumers, not the professional user who is subjected to a partly different, and certainly more intense exposure to hazardous substances. Against this background, this systematic review aims to compile and appraise evidence regarding skin toxicity of 2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA; CAS no. 212‐782‐2) and ethyl cyanoacrylate (ECA; CAS no. 7085‐85‐0) contained in cosmetic glues used among hairdressers and beauticians who perform nail treatments and eyelash extension as well as hair extension applications. This systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic review and Meta‐Analysis (PRISMA) 2020 recommendations for reporting systematic reviews and meta‐analysis. In total, six publications from six countries were eligible for this systematic review. A meta‐analysis revealed that hairdressers and beauticians have a ninefold increased risk of developing contact allergy to HEMA compared with controls who are not hairdressers and beauticians. Results for ECA are lacking. The results of this systematic review clearly show that—regarding contact allergy to acrylates—it is not appropriate to apply risk assessment for consumers to hairdressers and beauticians who occupationally handle cosmetic glues. The regulations in existence do not adequately address occupational risks for hairdressers and beauticians connected with the use of acrylate‐containing cosmetic substances and need reconsideration. |
| Databáze: | OpenAIRE |
| Externí odkaz: |
|