Search This Blog

468x60.

728x90


Because of this, sun exposure should be limited to 90 to 120 minutes for each outing

after appropriate sunscreen application. Further, environmental factors, such as

elevated atmospheric humidity, and inadequate application techniques, may reduce

photoprotection by as much as half.

Table 42-4

Relative Ultraviolet Protection Factor (UPF) by Ultraviolet Ray (UVR)

Transmission and Absorption

UVR Transmitted (%) UVR Absorbed (%) UPF Protection Category

10 90.0 10 Moderate protection

5 95.0 20 High protection

3.3 96.7 30 Very high protection

2.5 97.5 40 Extremely high protection

<2.0 >98.0 50 Maximal protection

p. 854

p. 855

Sunscreen formulations with SPF as high as 50 can be made using combinations of

chemical and physical sunscreen agents.

6

Individuals who are extremely sensitive to

the sun may benefit from formulations with higher SPF, but the average fair-skinned

person gains adequate protection for sunbathing or for average daily exposure from a

product with an SPF of 30.

48

CASE 42-1, QUESTION 8: Would J.J. gain additional benefit from a product with an SPF greater than 50?

Protection from sunburn increases with higher SPF; however, it is important to

remind J.J. that this protection does not correlate to the extent of skin damage from

UVA rays. One study reported less sunburn in patients who applied SPF 85

compared with those who applied SPF 50 and spent a similar amount of time in

direct sunlight.

106

In the FDA amendment that went into effect in 2012, SPF ratings

were limited to a maximum of 50+ due to lack of evidence for greater efficacy at

higher SPF ratings.

57 J.J. should also be reminded that the SPF is only accurate if he

correctly applies the sunscreen in the adequate amount.

PROTECTIVE EYEWEAR

CASE 42-1, QUESTION 9: Recommend appropriate protective eyewear for R.J. and J.J.’s family while

they are on vacation.

R.J. and J.J. should wear sunglasses when outdoors to decrease their lifelong

exposure to solar radiation and while at the beach to prevent high exposure of UVR

and possible photokeratitis or conjunctivitis. Many manufacturers of sunglasses label

their products according to three categories: cosmetic, general purpose, and special

purpose. Cosmetic sunglasses block at least 70% of UVB, at least 20% of UVA, and

less than 60% of visible light and are appropriate for casual wear when high

exposure to UVR is unlikely. General-purpose sunglasses block at least 95% of

UVB, at least 60% of UVA, and 60% to 92% of visible light and are appropriate for

most activities in sunny environments.

107 Special-purpose sunglasses block at least

99% of UVB, at least 60% of UVA, and at least 97% of visible light and are

appropriate for very bright environments, such as ski slopes or tropical beaches.

107

Special- or general-purpose sunglasses are appropriate recommendations for R.J.,

J.J, and their children to wear while on vacation.

Tanning Booths

CASE 42-2

QUESTION 1: B.P., a 32-year-old woman, is preparing for a business trip to Cancun. She is seeking advice

about the use of a tanning bed to stimulate melanin for the prevention of sunburn while on her trip. B.P. has skin

type III and light brown hair and green eyes. She recently heard, however, that a tan produced by artificial

sunlight may not protect against sunburn and may even cause skin cancer. What advice will you offer her?

Most tanning beds, booths, or salons use an artificial light source that emits about

95% UVA with minimal (i.e., 1%–5%) UVB.

108,109

It was originally thought that UVA

is much less likely to produce photoaging and photocarcinogenic changes of the skin

than UVB; however, UVA has now been found to cause many of the same effects on

the skin as UVB, including immunologic, degenerative, and neoplastic changes, as

well as damage to DNA and the formation of reactive oxygen species.

110 UVA also

contributes to cataract formation and the activation of herpetic lesions.

25 The high

doses of UVA received during a tanning session, as well as increasing cumulative

UVA doses over time, raise great concern about the long-term effects of UVA.

111

In

addition, UVA may augment the photocarcinogenic effect of UVB,

74 and extensive

evidence indicates a relationship between indoor tanning and melanoma.

112 Tanning

bed use dramatically increased from less than 1% of Americans in 1988 to 27% of

Americans in 2007.

113 However, results from the National Health Interview Survey

noted a decrease in adults who frequented tanning salons from 5.5% in 2010 to just

over 4.2% in 2013. The decrease is hypothesized to be due to increased awareness

regarding the harms of tanning. Concern still exists about the number of Americans

choosing to tan, especially within the adolescent population.

114 Participants of the

2013 Youth Risk Behavior Survey conducted by the CDC reported that about 13% of

high school students, including 20% of high school girls, had used an indoor tanning

device one or more times during the last year.

115 This issue is compounded by

evidence that suggests that excessive UV exposure, particularly tanning beds, may

have a behavioral component similar to other substance-related disorders, which

may be related to an endogenous release of opioids secondary to exposure to UV

light.

116 As many as 10% to 53% of young adults meet the criteria for having an

addictive component to indoor tanning behavior.

117–121

In an attempt to combat the

epidemic of use in young people, the FDA reclassified ultraviolet lamps to be class

II medical devices in 2014 and include a black box warning indicating that they

should not be used by minors 18 years old or younger.

122 Although this act placed

more regulation on tanning booths, concern has been raised that regulating tanning

equipment as medical devices implies that they offer a therapeutic benefit, and is not

commensurate with other products that are known carcinogens with very little to no

offered benefit.

123

With a skin type III, B.P. may be able gradually to achieve a moderate tan with

minimal burning, thus providing some protection from UVR because of increased

melanization of the skin. This UVA-induced tan, however, may not be as protective

as a tan achieved under normal sunlight conditions because UVA does not thicken the

stratum corneum.

118 An artificially produced tan plus subsequent sun exposure has not

been found to provide any net reduction in long-term damage to the skin when

compared with the same amount of tan obtained by sunbathing alone.

118 For these

reasons, B.P. should not use the tanning booth to obtain a protective tan, and she

should use appropriate photoprotective measures during her trip.

CASE 42-2, QUESTION 2: What precautions would you recommend if she decides to visit a tanning salon?

If B.P. decides to artificially tan despite your recommendation, she should

undertake some precautions. The FDA has recommended exposure schedules for

first-time users based on skin type, which determines a person’s minimal erythemal

dose (MED) of UV radiation. The MED is determined by the amount of UV exposure

necessary to produce any visible reddening of the skin 24 hours after exposure. This

policy suggests that exposure be limited to no more than 0.75 MED 3 times the first

week, followed by a gradual increase to maintenance doses of a maximum of 4.0

MED delivered weekly or biweekly.

124

It is important to remember that MED is

specific to an individual, and therefore will be different depending on his or her skin

type. Correlating the FDA’s policy into time limits for an individual is therefore

dependent on skin type as well as the amount of UV exposure provided by the tanning

apparatus the individual will use. To minimize cataract development, B.P. should

always wear protective eye wear that absorbs all UVA, UVB, and visible light up to

500 nm; simply closing her eyes or wearing regular sunglasses provides no

protective effect against eye damage.

p. 855

p. 856

SUNLESS TANNING PRODUCTS

CASE 42-2, QUESTION 3: B.P. decides to accept your recommendations to avoid tanning beds; however,

she would still like to have a tan before going to Cancun. Will the use of sunless tanning agents confer any

photoprotection for B.P. against sunburn?

Sunless tanner is a commercial term that denotes a product that provides a tanned

appearance without exposure to the sun or other sources of UVR. One commonly

used ingredient in these products is dihydroxyacetone (DHA), a color additive that

darkens the skin to orange brown by reacting with amino acids in the stratum

corneum. The term bronzer is used to describe a variety of products intended to

achieve a temporary tanned appearance. For example, among the products marketed

as bronzers are tinted moisturizers and brush-on powders. These produce a

temporary effect, similar to other types of makeup, and wash off over time. Some

products are marketed with other ingredients in addition to DHA to provide a tanned

appearance. Generally, neither sunless tanners nor bronzers provide any protective

activity to UV exposure by themselves, unless specifically listed with a SPF rating

125

As previously described, the FDA now requires that all suntanning preparations that

do not contain sunscreen ingredients are required to carry a warning statement on the

label that they do not protect against sunburn.

Tanning pills are promoted for tinting the skin by ingesting massive doses of color

additives, usually canthaxanthin. At large doses, canthaxanthin is deposited in

various organs, including skin, imparting an orange-bronze color. This color varies

from individual to individual. This colorization is not the result of an increase in the

skin’s supply of melanin. Although canthaxanthin is approved by the FDA for use as a

color additive in foods, in which it is used in small amounts, its use in these socalled tanning pills is not approved. Reported adverse events include drug-induced

retinopathy, nausea, gastrointestinal cramping, diarrhea, pruritus, and urticaria. None

of the above noted unapproved agents should be recommended for use.

Treatment of Sunburn

CASE 42-3

QUESTION 1: G.B., a 31-year-old man with skin type IV, returned a few hours ago from an afternoon of

activity in the sun. His shoulders, back, neck, and arms are bright red and are beginning to feel hot, stretched,

and painful. G.B. has been otherwise healthy, has no significant medical history, and has no known allergies to

medications. What treatment recommendations would you give G.B. for his sunburn?

Sunburn is a self-limiting condition, and treatment is usually symptomatic.

126

Suggested treatments that G.B. can try for his first-degree burn are oral (e.g.,

ibuprofen, aspirin) or topical (e.g., camphor, menthol) analgesics, topical antiinflammatory agents (e.g., hydrocortisone cream or aloe vera gel), cooling

compresses (tap water, saline, or aluminum acetate solution [Burow solution])

applied to the skin, or cool protectant baths (e.g., colloidal oatmeal). Nonsteroidal

anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), such as aspirin or ibuprofen, may be preferred

over acetaminophen because of blockade of the inflammatory prostaglandin-mediated

sunburn process; however, although offering symptomatic relief, corticosteroids,

NSAIDs, antioxidants, antihistamines, or emollients offer only mild improvement at

decreasing the time to recovery.

126

Topical anesthetics, such as benzocaine or lidocaine, provide only transient

analgesia for up to 15 to 45 minutes. These topical agents should not be used in large

quantities or applied more than 3 or 4 times a day. In addition, they should not be

used on raw, blistered, or abraded skin. Benzocaine has minimal systemic toxicities,

but is commonly associated with contact sensitization.

127

In contrast, lidocaine is

associated with a low incidence of contact sensitization.

128 Topical corticosteroids

have been shown to provide minimal clinical benefit when applied after UV

exposure.

129

If G.B. wants to try a topical agent, application or administration is

recommended when the pain is particularly bothersome, such as at bedtime. Oral

antihistamines may help control pruritus associated with sunburn, as well as aid with

sleep, if taken at bedtime; however, no definitive studies have shown benefit in

reducing symptoms or benefit of one agent over another.

Treatment beyond self-management is generally unnecessary unless the sunburn is

extensive with constitutional symptoms (i.e., fever, chills, nausea, vomiting),

involves second- or third-degree burns (particularly if on the eyes or genitalia), or

becomes infected. In such cases, referral of the patient to his or her healthcare

provider is indicated as a short course (i.e., up to 3 days) of an oral corticosteroid

may need to be given (e.g., 1 mg/kg of prednisone or equivalent, given once daily).

Clinical Application of Phototoxicity or Photoallergy

Phototoxic photosensitivity reactions are dose dependent and occur in almost any

person who takes or applies an adequate amount of the offending agent. The dose

necessary to produce such a reaction varies from person to person and depends on

such factors as complexion, hair and eye color, usual ability to tan, and type and

amount of UVR exposure. Phototoxic photosensitivity reactions are not

immunologically mediated or true allergic reactions; they can occur on first exposure

to the agent and generally show no cross-sensitivity to chemically related agents.

A phototoxic reaction usually has a rapid onset, often within several hours after

UVR exposure, and presents as an exaggerated or intensified sunburn with erythema,

pain, and prickling or burning. Blistering, desquamation, and hyperpigmentation can

occur in severe cases.

27,28 Symptoms generally peak 24 to 48 hours after the initial

exposure and are usually limited to the areas of UVR-exposed skin. Because

phototoxicity reactions do not involve the immune system, prior exposure to the

photosensitizer is unnecessary for this reaction to occur. Common drug classes

known to be phototoxic include fluoroquinolone, tetracycline, and sulfonamide

antibiotics, diuretics, sulfonylureas, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory agents.

Clinically, photoallergy differs from phototoxicity in that it produces an intensely

pruritic, eczematous form of dermatitis.

28 The rash is preceded by pruritus and may

subside within an hour. In 5% to 10% of cases, persistent hypersensitivity to light

occurs, even after the offending chemical has been eliminated.

27 Photoallergic

reactions are not dose-related, and eruptions can also be caused by chemically

related agents via cross-sensitivity or cross-allergenicity. As a type of delayed

hypersensitivity reaction, time is required to develop an immune response, and the

onset of a photoallergic reaction is often delayed for 1 to 3 days. These reactions can

present as macular, bullous, or purpuric lesions. Acute urticaria can occur within

minutes after UVR exposure. Recovery is slower than from a phototoxic reaction, and

it can persist after the offending product has been removed. These reactions may

present with erythema and possible edema secondary to the inflammation, but are

most commonly found to be eczematous, characterized by erythema; pruritus

(possible severe); and papules, vesicles, or both, with weeping, oozing, and crusting.

Scaling, lichenification, and pigmentation may occur later.

p. 856

p. 857

CASE 42-4

QUESTION 1: D.L., a 16-year-old, blond-haired, blue-eyed teenager with skin type II, presents with a severe

sunburn. He states that he started a new summer job 2 days ago with typical sun exposure. He is surprised at

the severity of this sunburn, which is worse than normal for the same amount of sun exposure. What further

information do you need to know before making treatment recommendations?

Because D.L. is reporting symptoms that differ from previous sun exposures,

further questions should be asked regarding the history of the current scenario.

Information that may be important in the history of the condition include the temporal

relationship between sun exposure and onset of symptoms; the nature and duration of

symptoms; recent ingestion or topical application of medications; possible exposure

to photosensitizers, chemical irritants, or plants that can cause allergic contact

dermatitis (e.g., poison ivy); and the potential for arthropod bites. Information that

may be important from the physical examination includes the distribution and

morphology of the reaction, as well as areas of the body spared of the reaction.

A drug-induced photosensitivity reaction most commonly appears as a sunburn of

greater severity than would normally be expected or as a rash in areas exposed to the

sun or tanning apparatus. These reactions can be secondary to oral medications;

however, it is important to remember that chemicals with photosensitization potential

are found in cosmetics, shampoos, moisturizing lotions, hair dyes or tints, soaps, and

other topically applied medications and agents.

Drug-induced photosensitivity reactions can be subdivided into phototoxic and

photoallergic reactions. The same medication or agent may produce both phototoxic

and photoallergic reactions, and it may at times be difficult to differentiate clinically

between the two types of reactions.

CASE 42-4, QUESTION 2: On further questioning, you discover that D.L. first experienced painful

erythema of the extensor surface of his hands and forearms, the anterior aspect of his neck, and parts of his

face within hours of starting his new job at an outdoor garden and greenhouse. Besides painful erythema, the

symptoms also included an immediate prickling and burning sensation. The symptoms continued to worsen until

the following morning, about 24 hours after initial exposure to the sun. D.L. does not recall orally ingesting or

topically applying any medication or other preparation to his skin, nor does he recall exposure to any chemical

irritants, or poison ivy or oak. The morphology of the skin lesions is that of an exaggerated sunburn. The skin

lesions are patchy in distribution with greater density on his forearms and hands than on his neck and face. The

posterior aspect of his neck and covered areas of his body was spared completely. What are some possible

causes of his exaggerated sunburn reaction?

The most likely explanation for D.L.’s exaggerated sunburn reaction is

phototoxicity, secondary to contact with psoralen-like chemicals from the plants at

his job at the outdoor garden and greenhouse. Photoallergy is another possible cause

of D.L.’s symptoms. Although much less common than phototoxicity, photoallergy

requires prior or prolonged exposure to the photosensitizing compound.

Presumably, D.L. came into contact with psoralen-containing plants and

simultaneous exposure to sunlight. With an unusual distribution of lesions on his

hands, forearms, neck, and face and the lack of lesions on areas not contacted by the

plants or sunlight, the temporal relationship between the exposure and onset of

symptoms places phototoxicity higher in the differential diagnosis. D.L. is unlikely to

have a photoallergic reaction because of the lack of a delayed temporal relationship

between the onset of symptoms and combined exposure to a psoralen-containing plant

and sunlight. Unlike phototoxicity reactions, photoallergic reactions can spread to

areas that have not been exposed to sunlight; however, D.L.’s lesions were limited to

areas of skin exposed to sunlight.

CASE 42-4, QUESTION 3: What nonprescription remedies might you recommend for D.L. at this time?

General recommendations for the management of phototoxicity and photoallergy

reactions are focused on the removal of exposure to the potential photosensitizer and

reduced exposure to the sun. Patients should be counseled not to take any

medications, orally or topically, without first consulting with their healthcare

provider to minimize exposure to other photosensitizers. D.L. should try wearing

long-sleeved shirts, pants, and gloves when working to limit exposure to plant

photosensitizers. He also may try applying a broad-spectrum sunscreen to protect his

skin from UVB and UVA radiation. If these measures do not prevent further

photosensitivity reactions, D.L. should consider a different type of employment. His

presenting symptoms should be managed in a manner similar to that for an

exaggerated sunburn.

PHOTOAGING

Incidence, Prevalence, and Epidemiology

Photoaging, or premature aging of the skin, involves skin changes that differ from

those associated with normal chronologic aging.

130,131 Aside from advancing age, risk

factors that have been associated with photoaging include fair skin, male gender, high

sun exposure, and smoking.

115,132 Because recognizing photoaging and photodamage

may prevent the progression or development of skin cancer, it is important that they

are recognized as real medical problems, not just cosmetic or aesthetic concerns.

Etiology

Normal aging of the skin involves fine wrinkling of the skin, atrophy of the dermis,

and a decrease in the amount of subcutaneous adipose tissue, all of which lead to a

state of hypocellularity of the skin.

131 Photoaging involves a chronic inflammatory

state induced by long-term exposure to UVA radiation from reactive oxygen species

(ROS), leading to a hypermetabolic state of the skin.

133 Photodamaged skin is

characterized histologically by an accumulation of excessive quantities of thickened,

degenerated elastic connective tissue fibers (elastosis).

131 Type I collagen

predominates in normal skin, but in photodamaged skin, type III collagen increases

about fourfold, and the mature matrix of type I collagen slightly decreases.

110 These

degenerative changes in connective tissue may be caused by hyperactive fibroblasts

or by enzymatic degradation via cellular infiltrates in inflamed skin.

6 The elastic

connective tissue then replaces the collagen in the upper parts of the dermis.

133 The

ground substance, composed of proteoglycans and glycosaminoglycans, also is

increased considerably in photoaged skin.

6 Capillaries in the dermis become dilated

and tortuous, resulting in telangiectasias, ecchymosis, and purpura.

131 The epidermis

thickens, and epidermal cells become hyperplastic and possibly neoplastic. Large

cumulative doses of UVA, UVB, and possibly infrared radiation during the course of

a lifetime are strongly implicated as the cause of these changes in photoaged skin.

6

p. 857

No comments:

Post a Comment

اكتب تعليق حول الموضوع

mcq general

 

Search This Blog