Literature DB >> 1017180

Rejection of metal to metal prosthesis and skin sensitivity to cobalt.

D Munro-Ashman, A J Miller.   

Abstract

Metal to metal prostheses give satisfactory results in 90% of patients. About half of the failure rate may be due to allergic reaction to the metals involved, particularly cobalt. A total of 35 patients in this unsatisfactory group have been patch-tested; 16 were positive to metals, 13 to cobalt, 4 to nickel, and 2 to chromate. Only two patients showed any skin lesions - one a localized dermatitis round the knee joint from nickel sensitivity, and one to cobalt who had a widespread scattered circular erythematous lesion suggestive of a generalized allergic vasculitis. Patients requiring a metal/metal prosthesis should have a careful history taken for metal sensitivity and be patch-tested with the metals. All the patients in this investigation had metal/metal prostheses and no reaction was seen after metal/high density polyethylene implants. Titanium 318 may be a satisfactory substitute for cobalt chrome alloy if reactions are encountered.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1976        PMID: 1017180     DOI: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1976.tb02986.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Contact Dermatitis        ISSN: 0105-1873            Impact factor:   6.600


  16 in total

1.  In vitro reactivity to implant metals demonstrates a person-dependent association with both T-cell and B-cell activation.

Authors:  Nadim James Hallab; Marco Caicedo; Rachel Epstein; Kyron McAllister; Joshua J Jacobs
Journal:  J Biomed Mater Res A       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 4.396

Review 2.  Systemic contact dermatitis and allergy to biomedical devices.

Authors:  Marcella Aquino; Tania Mucci
Journal:  Curr Allergy Asthma Rep       Date:  2013-10       Impact factor: 4.806

3.  [Metallurgical differentiation of cobalt-chromium alloys for implants].

Authors:  U Holzwarth; P Thomas; W Kachler; J Göske; A Schuh
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 1.087

4.  Loosening of a total hip prosthesis at contact allergy due to benzoyl peroxide.

Authors:  M Jäger; B R Balda
Journal:  Arch Orthop Trauma Surg       Date:  1979-08

5.  [Pathological findings in tissue surrounding revised metal/metal articulations].

Authors:  W Baur; W Hönle; H-G Willert; A Schuh
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2005-03       Impact factor: 1.087

6.  [Implant allergies].

Authors:  P Thomas; M Thomsen
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 0.751

7.  [Allergic potential of titanium implants].

Authors:  A Schuh; P Thomas; W Kachler; J Göske; L Wagner; U Holzwarth; R Forst
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 1.087

8.  [Orthopedic surgical implants and allergies: joint statement by the implant allergy working group (AK 20) of the DGOOC (German association of orthopedics and orthopedic surgery), DKG (German contact dermatitis research group) and dgaki (German society for allergology and clinical immunology)].

Authors:  P Thomas; A Schuh; J Ring; M Thomsen
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2008-01       Impact factor: 1.087

9.  [Metal sensitivity in patients with joint replacement arthroplasties before and after surgery].

Authors:  C Rau; P Thomas; M Thomsen
Journal:  Orthopade       Date:  2008-02       Impact factor: 1.087

10.  Metal sensitivity causing loosened joint prostheses.

Authors:  K Christiansen; K Holmes; P J Zilko
Journal:  Ann Rheum Dis       Date:  1980-10       Impact factor: 19.103

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.