BACKGROUND: The evidence on the safety of topical preparations containing botanical extracts is limited. OBJECTIVES: To assess (i) the use of botanically derived compounds in a large population, (ii) the incidence of cutaneous side-effects, and (iii) the diagnostic usefulness of patch testing. METHODS: A questionnaire was used in 2661 patients to assess both the prevalence and type of topical botanical preparations used, and the occurrence of adverse skin reactions. Patients declaring adverse reactions were patch tested with (i) the Italian (SIDAPA) baseline series, (ii) an additional botanical series, and (iii) the patients' own products. RESULTS: Of the patients, 1274 (48%) reported the use of topical botanical products; 139 patients (11%) commented on adverse cutaneous reactions; 75 (54%) showed positive reactions with the Italian baseline series. Among the 122 patients tested with the botanical series, 19 (16%) showed positive reactions, in many cases with concomitant relevant positivity to at least one allergen of the Italian series connected with cosmetics. The commonest botanically derived allergens were propolis, Compositae extracts, and Melaleuca alternifolia (tea tree) oil. CONCLUSIONS: Contact allergy is a possible adverse effect of natural products. Baseline series supplemented with the commonest botanical allergens may be adequate for detecting most of the cases of contact allergy to natural topical products.

Topical botanically derived products: use, skin reactions, and usefulness of patch tests. A multicentre Italian study.

CORAZZA, Monica;BORGHI, Alessandro;VIRGILI, Anna
2013

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The evidence on the safety of topical preparations containing botanical extracts is limited. OBJECTIVES: To assess (i) the use of botanically derived compounds in a large population, (ii) the incidence of cutaneous side-effects, and (iii) the diagnostic usefulness of patch testing. METHODS: A questionnaire was used in 2661 patients to assess both the prevalence and type of topical botanical preparations used, and the occurrence of adverse skin reactions. Patients declaring adverse reactions were patch tested with (i) the Italian (SIDAPA) baseline series, (ii) an additional botanical series, and (iii) the patients' own products. RESULTS: Of the patients, 1274 (48%) reported the use of topical botanical products; 139 patients (11%) commented on adverse cutaneous reactions; 75 (54%) showed positive reactions with the Italian baseline series. Among the 122 patients tested with the botanical series, 19 (16%) showed positive reactions, in many cases with concomitant relevant positivity to at least one allergen of the Italian series connected with cosmetics. The commonest botanically derived allergens were propolis, Compositae extracts, and Melaleuca alternifolia (tea tree) oil. CONCLUSIONS: Contact allergy is a possible adverse effect of natural products. Baseline series supplemented with the commonest botanical allergens may be adequate for detecting most of the cases of contact allergy to natural topical products.
Corazza, Monica; Borghi, Alessandro; Gallo, R.; Schena, D.; Pigatto, P.; Lauriola, M. M.; Guarneri, F.; Stingeni, L.; Vincenzi, C.; Foti, C.; Virgili, Anna
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: http://hdl.handle.net/11392/1869320
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 44
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 38
social impact