Allergic contact dermatitis in response to contact with polychloroprene

Polychloroprene (trade name neoprene) is a rubber material, which is in common use as it is waterproof, stretchable, and resistant to physical and chemicals damage.1 Polychloroprene is applied in various diving equipment, goggles, gloves, shoe insoles, protective clothing, and orthopaedic braces and new areas of usage are developing continuously. Polychloroprene often contains residues of thiourea compounds, which have a sensitising potential and thus may cause allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). Between 2009 and 2022, seven patients suspected to have developed dermatitis in response to contact with polychloroprene, were examined at the Department of Occupational Medicine, Haukeland University Hospital, Bergen, Norway. The patients were all men and with a mean age of 38 years (minimum of 19 years, maximum of 47 years) at debut of dermatitis (Table 1). Open cell wet suit Natural rubber wet suit Diving socks Goggles Feet/ankles Truncus Arms Periorbital Patch of suit (as is) (+++)/(N.A.)/(+++) Shoe insoles Weight vest Feet Truncus Survival suit Orthopaedic knee brace Arms Wrists Patch of cuff (as is) (+++)/(N.A.)/(+) Survival suit Orthopaedic knee brace Patch of cuff (as is) (N.A.)/(−)/(N.A.) Cuff extraction (acetone) (?+)/(N.A.)/(−) Extraction orthopaedic knee brace (acetone) (+)/(N.A.)/(?+) Survival suit Rubber boots Survival suit Wet suit Three patients had no relevant occupational exposures. Two of the patients had used diving equipment during leisure (kayak paddling dry suit, wet suits, diving socks and goggles) (patients 1 and 2), while one patient had used shoe insoles and a weight west (patient 3). Four patients had relevant exposures at work as well as during leisure. Three patients (patient 4, 5, and 6) worked at offshore installations and used survival suits with polychloroprene cuffs during helicopter transportation. All offshore workers had relevant leisure exposures; two had used orthopaedic knee braces during sport activities (patient 4 and 5) while one had used rubber boots (patient 6). One patient (patient 7) had used a survival suit at work in the Navy and a wet suit during leisure. Information derived from the patients' medical records stated that two patients had a childhood history of atopic dermatitis (patient 3 and 7). Patient 7 was diagnosed with dyshidrotic dermatitis at a later stage. Patient 5 had symptoms of dyshidrotic dermatitis and/or nummular dermatitis, while patient 6 had previous episodes of psoriasis. Patch testing was performed on the upper back of each patient using Chemotechnique patch test series, IQ ultra chambers (Chemotechnique Diagnostics, Vellinge, Sweden) and Primafix tape (Smith investigation; project administration; resources; writing – original draft; writing – review and editing. Bjørg Eli Hollund: Methodology; investigation; writing – review and editing. Hilde Kristin Vindenes: Conceptualization; methodology; investigation; resources; writing – review and editing. The authors thank the patients for giving their written consent to participate in the study. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.