Positive patch test reactions to allergens of the dental series and the relation to the clinical presentations. Contact Dermat
Department of Dermatology, Rambam Medical Center, Haifa 31096, Israel.Contact Dermatitis (Impact Factor: 3.75). 11/2006; 55(4):216-8. DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2006.00905.x
The clinical manifestations of contact allergic dermatitis to dental materials are not uniform. This study was performed to detect the frequent allergens in the dental series associated with contact dermatitis and to define the causal relationship between the different allergens and the relevant clinical presentations. Between the years 2000 and 2004, 134 patients, aged 20-80 years, were patch tested. 121 patients were included in the study. The most frequent oral manifestations were cheilitis and perioral dermatitis (25.6%), burning mouth (15.7%), lichenoid reaction (14.0%), and orofacial granulomatosis (10.7%). 18 (14.9%) patients were dental personnel, all of whom suffered from hand dermatitis. The common allergens detected included goldsodiumthiosulphate (14.0%), nickel sulfate (13.2%), mercury (9.9%), palladium chloride (7.4%), cobalt chloride (5.0%), and 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (5.8%). Positive reactions to metals were frequent in all the different clinical variants, and no specific association between a specific clinical presentation and a particular allergen was found. Allergy to mercury was not a significant factor contributing to the pathogenesis of oral lichenoid reactions. However, a strong association with contact allergy to mercury in dental fillings was found in 2 patients with orofacial granulomatosis.
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "Prosthodontic restorations and appliances consist of many designs including conventional and implant-supported crowns, fixed prostheses (dental bridges), and removable prostheses or dentures. Various prosthetic treatments are known to cause allergic reactions both in patients and dental personnel. "
ABSTRACT: Background:Dental products are widely used by patients and dental personnel alike and may cause problems for both. Dental materials could cause contact allergy with varying manifestations such as burning, pain, stomatitis, cheilitis, ulcers, lichenoid reactions localized to the oral mucosa in patients, and hand dermatitis in dental personnel. Patch testing with the dental series comprising commonly used materials can be used to detect contact allergies to dental materials.Aim:This study aimed to identify contact allergy among patients who have oral mucosal lesions after dental treatment and among dental personnel who came in contact with these materials.Materials and Methods:Twenty patients who had undergone dental procedures with symptoms of oral lichen planus, oral stomatitis, burning mouth, and recurrent aphthosis, were included in the study. Dental personnel with history of hand dermatitis were also included in the study. Patch testing was performed using Chemotechnique Dental Series and results interpreted as recommended by the International Contact Dermatitis Research Group (ICDRG).Results:Out of 13 patients who had undergone dental treatment/with oral symptoms, six patients with stomatitis, lichenoid lesions, and oral ulcers showed positive patch tests to a variety of dental materials, seven patients with ulcers had negative patch tests, seven dental personnel with hand dermatitis showed multiple allergies to various dental materials, and most had multiple positivities.Conclusion:The patch test is a useful, simple, noninvasive method to detect contact allergies among patients and among dental personnel dealing with these products. Long term studies are necessary to establish the relevance of these positive patch tests by eliminating the allergic substances, identifying clinical improvement, and substituting with nonallergenic materials.07/2014; 5(3):282-6. DOI:10.4103/2229-5178.137778
- "thiosulphate (14.0%), nickel sulfate (13.2%), mercury (9.9%), palladium chloride (7.4%), and cobalt chloride (5.0%) (Khamaysi et al., 2006 "
Chapter: Dental Metal AllergyContact Dermatitis, 12/2011; , ISBN: 978-953-307-577-8
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
- "The allergens tested in this study that showed the greatest frequency of sensitization were: palladium chloride, ammoniated mercury, benzoyl peroxide and amalgam, which differed from what has been reported in some other studies (2, 16). However the high palladium sensitization is similar to others studies (21, 22) and the amalgam and mercury are the most dental material with positive patch test reaction in others (23). "
ABSTRACT: Some studies report that atopic patients have a greater frequency of delayed-type sensitization than non-atopic patients. Objective: To determine the influence of the atopic condition on delayed sensitization to dental materials. cross-sectional study. Forty (40) atopic subjects and forty (40) non-atopic subjects, of both sexes, between 20 and 65 years of age were included. The determination of delayed sensitization to dental materials was performed using patch test. An oral exam was also carried out to check for lesions of the oral mucosa. 61.25% of the patients were positive for delayed-type sensitization to one or more allergens, being palladium chloride (21.25%), ammoniated mercury (20%), benzoyl peroxide (12.5%) and amalgam (10%) the most frequent. The frequency of sensitization was 67.5% in the group of atopic patients, compared to 55% in the non atopic group (p>0.05). The materials with the greatest difference of sensitization in atopic compared to non-atopic patients were ammoniated mercury, benzoyl peroxide, amalgam and Bisphenol A Dimethacrylate (BIS-GMA). The atopic condition is not related to a higher frequency of delayed sensitization to a battery of dental materials.Medicina oral, patologia oral y cirugia bucal 12/2011; 17(2):e320-4. DOI:10.4317/medoral.17424 · 1.17 Impact Factor
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.