{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01889644746787604, 'fraction_numerical': 0.011337868480725623, 'mean_word_length': 4.910714285714286, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A case of textile dermatitis due to disperse blue on the surgical wound

Disperse blue (DB) 106 and DB 124 are the most frequent fabric dye allergens inducing textile dermatitis, but contact allergy to them may easily undiagnosed because the clinical picture usually needs high index of suspicion. We present the case of a 35-year-old woman who was referred for a recurred lesion over the incision scar of right total hip replacement surgery, which did not respond to treatment with povidone–iodine, mupirocin, and rifampicin. Patch testing, conducted with a European standard series and therapeutics that were used in the treatment of the lesion, revealed a positive reaction to dispersion mix blue 106/124. The patient was questioned in detail and reported that she has been wearing dark-colored synthetic panties for long years. The correlation was done between the positive antigen in the patch test and the clinical findings. The patient was treated with a corticosteroid cream for 2 weeks. She did not wear any dark-colored synthetic panties afterward and no flare-up was seen in the follow-up period. In this report, we emphasize the importance of detailed questioning of patients and that contact dermatitis should be considered potential cause of dermatitis at skin sites where the barrier function is compromised.