BACKGROUND: The incidence of allergies in general is on the increase. An allergic reaction can also occur during any dental and orthodontic treatment. However, the allergic potential of orthodontic appliances is frequently overestimated. MATERIAL AND METHOD: The incidence of suspected allergic reactions during fixed appliance therapy in 68 orthodontic offices in the German State of Hesse was determined by questionnaire at approximately 0.3% of the 60,000 patients covered. RESULTS: More extraoral (45%) than intraoral (17%) skin changes were registered, with both intraoral and extraoral changes being observed in 38%. In 53% of the affected cases the therapy was adapted to nickel-free materials, whereas it was continued as planned after a brief recovery period in 33%. The treatment was discontinued in 14% of the affected patients, corresponding to one in every 3150. The individual tolerance can often be tested by inserting one bracket or one band. In addition, early orthodontic treatment seems to promote a certain immune tolerance, especially towards extraoral nickel contacts. However, if a patient is known to have a nickel allergy, materials containing nickel should be renounced on principle in the orthodontic appliances. CONCLUSION: Skin changes occurring in the course of orthodontic treatment should be examined and verified if necessary by a dermatologist. Gold plating and other coatings (titanium nitride) of the metal elements even encourage corrosion after a brief protection period. Soldering should be avoided.
BACKGROUND: The incidence of allergies in general is on the increase. An allergic reaction can also occur during any dental and orthodontic treatment. However, the allergic potential of orthodontic appliances is frequently overestimated. MATERIAL AND METHOD: The incidence of suspected allergic reactions during fixed appliance therapy in 68 orthodontic offices in the German State of Hesse was determined by questionnaire at approximately 0.3% of the 60,000 patients covered. RESULTS: More extraoral (45%) than intraoral (17%) skin changes were registered, with both intraoral and extraoral changes being observed in 38%. In 53% of the affected cases the therapy was adapted to nickel-free materials, whereas it was continued as planned after a brief recovery period in 33%. The treatment was discontinued in 14% of the affected patients, corresponding to one in every 3150. The individual tolerance can often be tested by inserting one bracket or one band. In addition, early orthodontic treatment seems to promote a certain immune tolerance, especially towards extraoral nickel contacts. However, if a patient is known to have a nickelallergy, materials containing nickel should be renounced on principle in the orthodontic appliances. CONCLUSION: Skin changes occurring in the course of orthodontic treatment should be examined and verified if necessary by a dermatologist. Gold plating and other coatings (titanium nitride) of the metal elements even encourage corrosion after a brief protection period. Soldering should be avoided.