Importance Facial dermatitis in women is well characterized. However, recent shifts in the men's grooming industry may have important implications for male facial dermatitis. Objective To characterize male patients with facial dermatitis. Design, Setting, and Participants A 22-year retrospective cross-sectional analysis (1994-2016) of North American Contact Dermatitis Group (NACDG) data, including 50 507 patients who underwent patch testing by a group of dermatology board-certified patch test experts at multiple centers was carried out. Facial dermatitis was defined as involvement of the eyes, eyelids, lips, nose, or face (not otherwise specified). Main Outcomes and Measures The main outcome was to compare characteristics (including demographics and allergens) between male patients with facial dermatitis (MFD) and those without facial dermatitis (MNoFD) using statistical analysis (relative risk, CIs). Secondary outcomes included sources of allergic and irritant contact dermatitis and, for occupationally related cases, specific occupations and industries in MFD. Results Overall, 1332 male patients (8.0%) were included in the MFD group and 13 732 male patients (82.0%) were included in MNoFD. The mean (SD) age of participants was 47 (17.2) years in the MFD group and 50 (17.6) years in the MNoFD group. The most common facial sites were face (not otherwise specified, 817 [48.9%]), eyelids (392 [23.5%]), and lips (210 [12.6%]). Participants in the MFD group were significantly younger than MNoFD (mean age, 47 vs 50 years; P < .001). Those in the MFD group were less likely to be white (relative risk [RR], 0.92; 95% CI, -0.90 to 0.95) or have occupationally related skin disease (RR, 0.49; 95% CI, -0.42 to 0.58; P < .001) than MNoFD. The most common allergens that were associated with clinically relevant reactions among MFD included methylisothiazolinone (n = 113; 9.9%), fragrance mix I (n = 27; 8.5%), and balsam of Peru (n = 90; 6.8%). Compared with MNoFD, MFD were more likely to react to use of dimethylaminopropylamine (RR, 2.49; 95% CI, -1.42 to 4.37]) and paraphenylenediamine (RR, 1.43; 95% CI, -1.00 to 2.04; P < .001). Overall, 60.5% of NACDG allergen sources were personal care products. Conclusions and Relevance Although many allergens were similar in both groups, MFD were more likely to react to use of dimethylaminopropylamine and paraphenylenediamine, presumably owing to their higher prevalence in hair products. Most sources of allergic and irritant contact dermatitis in MFD were personal care products. This study provides insight into the risks and exposures of the increasing number of grooming products used by male dermatology patients. This will enable clinicians to better identify male patients who would benefit from patch testing and treat those with facial dermatitis.

中文翻译：

---

转诊接受补丁测试的男性患者的面部皮炎：1994年至2016年北美接触性皮炎组数据的回顾性分析。

重要性女性面部皮肤炎的特征很明显。但是，男性美容行业的最新变化可能对男性面部皮肤炎有重要影响。目的探讨男性面部皮肤炎患者的特征。设计，设置和参加者对北美接触性皮炎组（NACDG）数据进行的为期22年的回顾性横断面分析（1994-2016年），包括50 507名经过皮肤病学委员会认证的贴剂测试专家进行贴剂测试的患者在多个中心进行了。面部皮肤炎的定义为累及眼睛，眼睑，嘴唇，鼻子或脸部（未另作说明）。主要结果和措施主要结果是使用统计学分析（相对危险度，CI）比较患有面部皮炎（MFD）的男性患者和未患有面部皮炎（MNoFD）的男性患者的特征（包括人口统计学和过敏原）。次要结果包括过敏性和刺激性接触性皮炎的来源，以及与职业相关的病例，MFD中的特定职业和行业。结果总体上，MFD组包括1332例男性患者（8.0％），MFnod包括13 732例男性患者（82.0％）。MFD组的参与者的平均（SD）年龄为47（17.2）岁，MFoFD组的参与者的平均（SD）年龄为50（17.6）岁。最常见的面部部位是面部（未另作说明，为817 [48.9％]），眼睑（392 [23.5％]）和嘴唇（210 [12.6％]）。MFD组的参与者明显比MNoFD年轻（平均年龄，47岁vs 50岁； P <.001）。MFD组中的人不太可能是白人（相对危险度[RR]为0.92； 95％CI为-0.90至0.95）或职业相关的皮肤病（RR为0.49； 95％CI为-0.42至0.58； P <.001），而不是MNoFD。与MFD临床相关反应最相关的过敏原包括甲基异噻唑啉酮（n = 113； 9.9％），香料混合物I（n = 27； 8.5％）和秘鲁香脂（n = 90； 6.8％）。与MNoFD相比，MFD更有可能对使用二甲基氨基丙胺（RR，2.49； 95％CI，-1.42至4.37]）和对苯二胺（RR，1.43； 95％CI，-1.00至2.04； P <.001）产生反应。 。总体而言，NACDG过敏原来源中有60.5％是个人护理产品。结论和相关性尽管两组的许多过敏原相似，但MFD更有可能对二甲基氨基丙胺和对苯二胺的使用产生反应，这可能是由于它们在发制品中的患病率较高。MFD中大多数过敏性和刺激性接触性皮炎的来源都是个人护理产品。这项研究提供了对男性皮肤病患者使用越来越多的美容产品的风险和暴露的见解。这将使临床医生能够更好地识别将从斑贴测试中受益的男性患者，并治疗患有面部皮炎的男性患者。这项研究提供了对男性皮肤病患者使用越来越多的美容产品的风险和暴露的见解。这将使临床医生能够更好地识别将从斑贴测试中受益的男性患者，并治疗患有面部皮炎的男性患者。这项研究提供了对男性皮肤病患者使用越来越多的美容产品的风险和暴露的见解。这将使临床医生能够更好地识别将从斑贴测试中受益的男性患者，并治疗患有面部皮炎的男性患者。