» Articles » PMID: 31334475

Exploring the Incidence, Implications, and Relevance of Metal Allergy to Orthopaedic Surgeons

Overview
Specialty Orthopedics
Date 2019 Jul 24
PMID 31334475
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Introduction: Allergic reactions to metal implants are increasingly recognized, but its relevance to the orthopaedic surgeon remains unclear. We evaluate the prevalence of metal allergies in a subset of the population and review the significance through a survey of the current literature.

Methods: Preoperative and postoperative patients referred for metal allergy testing were divided into two groups; those with a history of dermatitis and those without. Patients with a history of dermatitis were offered skin patch testing that included the North American Contact Dermatitis core allergen panels in addition to our metal screening series. Patients without dermatitis were tested to the more limited patch testing metal screening series. Some patients with dermatitis opted for the more limited screening, whereas some patients without dermatitis underwent more extensive testing at their request or at the request of the referring clinician. Patch tests were evaluated at 2 and 4 days after placement.

Results: Hundred patients were referred for metal allergy testing, 46 of whom were for reasons related to planned orthopaedic surgery. Of those tested, 60 patients had a history of dermatitis and 40 did not. Some patients were nonreactive to all tested allergens, whereas others demonstrated one or more positive skin patch test reactions. The number of positive reactions to each metal in patients with a history of dermatitis was the following: nickel 19, amalgam 10, palladium 10, copper 8, cobalt 5, mercury 5, tin 2, gold 1, titanium 1, and vanadium 1. The number of positive reactions to metals in patients without a history of dermatitis was the following: nickel 4, amalgam 5, palladium 4, mercury 4, cobalt 4, tin 2, copper 2, gold 1, vanadium 1, and molybdenum 1.

Discussion: Metal allergy was common in the individuals referred for testing, with reactions to nickel and amalgam being the most commonly encountered. Some individuals experience more notable allergic reactions to implanted devices than others. Localized and generalized skin reactions have been reported, along with implant failure and loosening. Surgeons should be aware of the incidence of metal allergies and the potential consequences.

Citing Articles

Titanium Cable Cerclage Increases the Load to Failure in Plate Osteosynthesis for Distal Femoral Fractures.

Bliemel C, Cornelius J, Lehmann V, Oberkircher L, Visser D, Pass B Medicina (Kaunas). 2024; 60(9).

PMID: 39336565 PMC: 11434472. DOI: 10.3390/medicina60091524.


Existing and Novel Assessment Methods for Metal Sensitivity in Elective Lower-Limb Arthroplasty-A Scoping Review.

Abouharb A, Joseph P, Pandit H Arthroplast Today. 2024; 28:101462.

PMID: 39170964 PMC: 11338134. DOI: 10.1016/j.artd.2024.101462.


Polylactic acid bioabsorbable implants of the hand: A review.

Jee E, Robichaux-Edwards L, Montgomery C, Bilderback K, Perry K, Massey P J Hand Microsurg. 2024; 16(3):100053.

PMID: 39035860 PMC: 11257132. DOI: 10.1016/j.jham.2024.100053.


Endovascular Treatment of Cerebrovascular Lesions Using Nickel- or Nitinol-Containing Devices in Patients with Nickel Allergies.

Baranoski J, Catapano J, Rutledge C, Cole T, Majmundar N, Winkler E AJNR Am J Neuroradiol. 2023; 44(8):939-942.

PMID: 37474263 PMC: 10411833. DOI: 10.3174/ajnr.A7936.


Diagnosis and Management of a Hypersensitivity Reaction to Titanium-Containing Surgical Clips: A Case Report.

Ramcharan D, Alaimo K, Tiesenga F Cureus. 2023; 15(2):e34929.

PMID: 36938272 PMC: 10016148. DOI: 10.7759/cureus.34929.


References
1.
Hallab N, Merritt K, Jacobs J . Metal sensitivity in patients with orthopaedic implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2001; 83(3):428-36. DOI: 10.2106/00004623-200103000-00017. View

2.
Holgers K, Roupe G, Tjellstrom A, Bjursten L . Clinical, immunological and bacteriological evaluation of adverse reactions to skin-penetrating titanium implants in the head and neck region. Contact Dermatitis. 1992; 27(1):1-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1992.tb05189.x. View

3.
Hansen M, Menne T, Johansen J . Cr(III) and Cr(VI) in leather and elicitation of eczema. Contact Dermatitis. 2006; 54(5):278-82. DOI: 10.1111/j.0105-1873.2006.00824.x. View

4.
Svedman C, Ekqvist S, Moller H, Bjork J, Pripp C, Gruvberger B . A correlation found between contact allergy to stent material and restenosis of the coronary arteries. Contact Dermatitis. 2009; 60(3):158-64. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2008.01502.x. View

5.
Thyssen J, Menne T . Metal allergy--a review on exposures, penetration, genetics, prevalence, and clinical implications. Chem Res Toxicol. 2009; 23(2):309-18. DOI: 10.1021/tx9002726. View