Abstract:

Guo Yan, Sun Xiaodong, Shi Xin, Liu Runqiu, Jing Jing, Chen Jingjing, Shen Yue, Yu Cuiping, Yan Zhihua, Chen Xiaojian, Chen Lingling Department of Dermatology, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215004, China （Guo Y ［current affiliation: Department of Dermatology, Yancheng Third People′s Hospital, Yancheng 350001, Jiangsu, China］, Sun XD［current affiliation: Department of Dermatology, Fengnan District Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital of Tangshan City, Tangshan 063300, Hebei, China］, Shi Xin, Liu RQ［current affiliation: Department of Dermatology, First People′s Hospital of Yancheng City, Yancheng 224005, Jiangsu, China］, Jing J, Chen JJ, Shen Y, Yu CP, Yan ZH［current affiliation: Department of Dermatology, High-Tech Zone Hospital, Second Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University, Suzhou 215151, China］）; Department of Dermatology, Suzhou Municipal Hospital, Suzhou 215006, China （Chen XJ, Chen LL） Corresponding authors: Shi Xin, Email: shx9@163.com; Chen Lingling, Email: chenlingling031@126.com 【Abstract】 Objective To evaluate the effect of compound glycyrrhizin on skin patch test results. Methods A total of 84 patients who showed moderate positive （++） patch test reactions to nickel or formaldehyde were enrolled into this study. After the baseline patch tests, patients administrated 50 mg of compound glycyrrhizin tablets thrice a day for 2 weeks （middle-dose compound glycyrrhizin intervention）, then 70 mg of compound glycyrrhizin tablets thrice a day for 2 weeks （high-dose compound glycyrrhizin intervention）, and finally received intravenous injection of compound glycyrrhizin 60 ml once a day for 1 week （intravenous injection intervention）. Skin patch tests were conducted after each intervention. The results of skin patch tests were evaluated qualitatively and quantitatively. Statistical analysis was carried out by using the Wilcoxon rank sum test with the SPSS 19.0 software. Results Totally, 81 patients completed the middle-dose compound glycyrrhizin intervention trial, of whom, 66 were moderate positive （++）, 13 mild positive （+）, and 2 strong positive （+++） for skin patch tests following the trial, and no patient was negative. Significant differences were observed in the degree of reactivity （Z = -2.84, P = 0.005）, but not in qualitative results between the baseline and first post-intervention SPTs. Among 82 patients who completed the high-dose compound glycyrrhizin intervention, 37 were moderate positive （++）, 36 mild positive （+）, and 9 negative for the second post-intervention skin patch tests, with significant differences in qualitative results （Z = -3.000, P = 0.003） and degree of reactivity （Z = -6.247, P = 0.000） between the baseline and second post-intervention SPTs. Finally, 58 patients completed the intravenous injection intervention, of whom, 12 were moderate positive （++）, 10 mild positive （+）, and 36 negative for the post-intervention patch tests, with significant differences in qualitative results （Z = -6.000, P = 0.000） and the degree of reactivity （Z = -6.289, P = 0.000） between the baseline and third post-intervention SPTs. Conclusion Both high-dose oral compound glycyrrhizin and intravenous compound glycyrrhizin could evidently suppress skin patch test reactions, and compound glycyrrhizin is recommended to be withdrawn 2 weeks before skin patch tests.