» Articles » PMID: 35370980

Technologies for Type 1 Diabetes and Contact Dermatitis: Therapeutic Tools and Clinical Outcomes in a Cohort of Pediatric Patients

Overview
Specialty Endocrinology
Date 2022 Apr 4
PMID 35370980
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The increasing use of technological devices for the management of diabetes is related to the prolonged exposure of patients' skin to chemical and mechanical agents and, consequently, to the increased risk of developing dermatological complications. Among these, contact dermatitis is the most insidious skin disorder. Despite the magnitude of the issue, no universally accepted recommendations on the management of this common complication are currently available. Our observational study aimed to describe all the solutions adopted by patients and their caregivers to treat and prevent the appearance of contact dermatitis and to describe the clinical impact of this cutaneous complication. Twenty-one pediatric patients (mean age 12.1 ± 3.7 years) with type 1 diabetes were recruited in the study. The most common treatment used to treat acute skin lesions was the application of topical corticosteroids, sometimes associated with topical antibiotics (9.5%). In order to prevent the further appearance of dermatitis, the most frequently adopted measure was the use of hydrocolloid and/or silicone-based adhesives, followed by the application of protective barrier films. One patient reported benefit from the off-label use of fluticasone propionate nasal spray. However, only 52.4% of the study participants achieved a definitive resolution of the skin issue, and 38.1% of patients were forced to discontinue insulin pump therapy and/or continuous glucose monitoring. No differences were observed in glycated hemoglobin values between the period before and after the onset of contact dermatitis. Our study confirms the severity of this dermatological complication that may hinder the spread of new technologies for the management of diabetes. Finally, our findings highlight the importance of establishing close collaboration both with pediatric allergy specialists to prescribe the most suitable treatment and with manufacturing companies to ensure that adhesives of technological devices are free of harmful well-known sensitizers.

Citing Articles

Cutaneous Adverse Effects From Diabetes Devices in Pediatric Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic Review.

Podwojniak A, Flemming J, J Tan I, Ghani H, Neubauer Z, Jones A JMIR Dermatol. 2024; 7:e59824.

PMID: 39622650 PMC: 11587996. DOI: 10.2196/59824.


Insulin Pump Therapy and Adverse Skin Reactions With Focus on Allergic Contact Dermatitis in Individuals Living With Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Clinical-Based Update.

von Kobyletzki L, Ulriksdotter J, von Kobyletzki E, Mowitz M, Jendle J, Svedman C J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2024; 18(6):1300-1312.

PMID: 38853748 PMC: 11535278. DOI: 10.1177/19322968241252613.


Device-Related Skin Reactions Increase Emotional Burden in Youths With Type 1 Diabetes and Their Parents.

Passanisi S, Galletta F, Bombaci B, Cherubini V, Tiberi V, Minuto N J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2024; 18(6):1293-1299.

PMID: 38804535 PMC: 11535255. DOI: 10.1177/19322968241253285.


One-Year Real-World Study on Comparison among Different Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Devices for the Management of Pediatric Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: The Supremacy of Hybrid Closed-Loop Systems.

Bombaci B, Passanisi S, Alibrandi A, DArrigo G, Patroniti S, Averna S Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(16).

PMID: 36011925 PMC: 9408433. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph191610293.

References
1.
Weng A, Zachariae C, Christensen K, Svensson J, Berg A . Five-Month Follow-up Shows No Improvement in Dermatological Complications in Children With Type 1 Diabetes Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems and Insulin Pumps. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2019; 15(2):317-323. PMC: 8256062. DOI: 10.1177/1932296819882425. View

2.
Wang X, Zhao X, Chen D, Zhang M, Gu W . Comparison of Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion and Multiple Daily Injections in Pediatric Type 1 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis and Prospective Cohort Study. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2021; 12:608232. PMC: 7961074. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2021.608232. View

3.
Messer L, Berget C, Beatson C, Polsky S, Forlenza G . Preserving Skin Integrity with Chronic Device Use in Diabetes. Diabetes Technol Ther. 2018; 20(S2):S254-S264. PMC: 6011799. DOI: 10.1089/dia.2018.0080. View

4.
Pyl J, Dendooven E, van Eekelen I, den Brinker M, Dotremont H, France A . Prevalence and Prevention of Contact Dermatitis Caused by FreeStyle Libre: A Monocentric Experience. Diabetes Care. 2020; 43(4):918-920. DOI: 10.2337/dc19-1354. View

5.
Kamann S, Aerts O, Heinemann L . Further Evidence of Severe Allergic Contact Dermatitis From Isobornyl Acrylate While Using a Continuous Glucose Monitoring System. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2018; 12(3):630-633. PMC: 6154227. DOI: 10.1177/1932296818762946. View