Literature DB >> 11381343

A multicenter study of patch test reactions with dental screening series.

L Kanerva1, T Rantanen, K Aalto-Korte, T Estlander, M Hannuksela, R J Harvima, T Hasan, M Horsmanheimo, R Jolanki, K Kalimo, A Lahti, K Lammintausta, A Lauerma, A Niinimäki, K Turjanmaa, A M Vuorela.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Dental products contain many allergens, and may cause problems both for patients undergoing dental treatment and for dental personnel because of occupational exposure. Individual patch test clinics may not study sufficient numbers of patients to collect reliable data on uncommon allergens.
OBJECTIVE: To collect information on dental allergens based on a multicenter study.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: The Finnish Contact Dermatitis Group tested more than 4,000 patients (for most allergens, 2,300 to 2,600 patients) with dental screening series. Conventional patch testing was performed. The total number and percentage of irritant (scored as irritant [IR] or doubtful [?]) and allergic (scored as +, ++, or +++) patch test reactions, respectively, were calculated, as well as the highest and lowest percentage of allergic patch test reactions recorded by the different patch test clinics. A reaction index (RI) was calculated, giving information on the irritancy of the patch test substances.
RESULTS: The most frequent allergic patch test reactions were caused by nickel (14.6%), ammoniated mercury (13%), mercury (10.3%), gold (7.7%), benzoic acid (4.3%), palladium (4.2%) and cobalt (4.1%). 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2.8%) provoked most of the reactions caused by (meth)acrylates. Menthol, peppermint oil, ammonium tetrachloroplatinate, and amalgam alloying metals provoked no (neither allergic nor irritant) patch test reactions.
CONCLUSION: Patch testing with allergens in the dental screening series, including (meth)acrylates and mercury, needs to be performed to detect contact allergy to dental products. Copyright 2001 by W.B. Saunders Company.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11381343

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Contact Dermat        ISSN: 1046-199X


  5 in total

1.  Determination of susceptibility to sensitization to dental materials in atopic and non-atopic patients.

Authors:  G Rojas-Alcayaga; A Carrasco-Labra; P Danús; M-A Guzmán; I Morales-Bozo; B Urzúa; A Ortega-Pinto
Journal:  Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal       Date:  2012-03-01

2.  Lichenoid contact reaction to eugenol presenting as oral lichen planus.

Authors:  Melika Behzad; Christiane Michl; Nicole Arweiler; Wolfgang Pfützner
Journal:  Allergo J Int       Date:  2014-11-06

Review 3.  Unmet diagnostic needs in contact oral mucosal allergies.

Authors:  Paola Lucia Minciullo; Giovanni Paolino; Maddalena Vacca; Sebastiano Gangemi; Eustachio Nettis
Journal:  Clin Mol Allergy       Date:  2016-09-01

4.  Allergic reaction to mint leads to asthma.

Authors:  Anthony M Szema; Tisha Barnett
Journal:  Allergy Rhinol (Providence)       Date:  2011-01

5.  Evaluation of dental material series from patients with dental prostheses and suspicion of delayed hypersensitivity.

Authors:  Fernanda Cortinhas Yoshimura; Victor do Espirito Santo Cunha; Ruppert Ludwig Hahnstadt; Mário Cezar Pires
Journal:  An Bras Dermatol       Date:  2016-04       Impact factor: 1.896

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.