Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors, insulin pumps, and tapes: Results from a 5-year period

34 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The number of patients with contact dermatitis from glucose sensors and insulin infusion sets is increasing. Patch testing is challenging because of a lack of information concerning the constituent materials of medical devices.

OBJECTIVES: To report on products and causes of allergic reactions to glucose sensors or insulin infusion sets over a 5-year period and suggest a short screening series.

METHODS: Analysis of patch test data from consecutive patients suspected of allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) to glucose sensors and/or insulin infusion sets from 2015-2019.

RESULTS: Patient numbers increased from 4 to 15 per year; 30/38 (78.9%) were children. In 29 (76.3%), a diagnosis of allergic/probable ACD was established, mostly due to the tapes of the device or allergens in these tapes (n = 23) followed by allergens in the device housing (n = 10). Isobornyl acrylate, abitol, and colophonium were the most common allergens. Information from manufacturers was often difficult to obtain and, if accessible, inadequate. For this reason, the diagnosis was delayed for more than 1.5 years in 12 (31%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS: The increasing number of patients, mostly children, with ACD from devices used in treatment of type 1 diabetes demonstrates the importance of this problem. Allergies can easily be overlooked, due to the lack of mandatory labeling of the constituent materials of the devices.

Original languageEnglish
JournalContact Dermatitis
Volume84
Issue number2
Pages (from-to)75-81
Number of pages7
ISSN0105-1873
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Feb 2021

Keywords

  • abitol, colophonium, contact allergy, glucose sensors, insulin pumps, isobornyl acrylate

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Contact dermatitis caused by glucose sensors, insulin pumps, and tapes: Results from a 5-year period'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this