Literature DB >> 15473335

Lymphocyte transformation testing for quantifying metal-implant-related hypersensitivity responses.

Nadim James Hallab1.   

Abstract

Hypersensitivity to metallic implants has been documented in case reports and cohort studies. However, this phenomenon remains unpredictable and poorly understood. There is continuing concern about the extrapolation of dermal patch testing to the periimplant environment. The utility of lymphocyte transformation testing (LTT) for predicting implant-related sensitivity in orthopedic patients was evaluated by contrasting LTT and patch-testing protocols and examining original cohort LTT data of subjects with and without implants. LTT of peripheral blood lymphocytes was performed, using four groups: (1) age-matched controls; (2) patients with osteoarthritis (preimplant), with and without dermal metal sensitivity; and (3) patients with total hip arthroplasty. A stimulation index of greater than 2 ( p < .05) indicated metal sensitivity. Patients with osteoarthritis and a history of metal sensitivity were more reactive to nickel than were those of any other group, as expected (ie, 66% incidence and average stimulation index of > 20). However, subjects with implants (group 3) were threefold more reactive to chromium (p < .04) than were controls (group 1) or subjects with osteoarthritis (group 2). Quantifiable lymphocyte reactivity as exemplified by increased incidence and average reactivity levels was metal implant specific (characteristic of adaptive immune responses) and suggests that LTT may be useful in the determination of implant-specific sensitivity. Advantages of LTT include quantitative results and the facilitation of multichallenge agent and dose testing. Thus, LTT (provided by laboratories fully disclosing testing methods) may be an additional tool in the armamentarium of physicians.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15473335     DOI: 10.2310/6620.2004.03054

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Dermatitis        ISSN: 1710-3568            Impact factor:   4.845


  7 in total

Review 1.  [Allergic reactions to bioimplants].

Authors:  L Klimek
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2022-03-28       Impact factor: 1.284

2.  Allergic reactions in arthroplasty: myth or serious problem?

Authors:  Daniel Guenther; Peter Thomas; Daniel Kendoff; Mohamed Omar; Thorsten Gehrke; Carl Haasper
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2015-11-02       Impact factor: 3.075

3.  A review of the biologic effects of spine implant debris: Fact from fiction.

Authors:  Nadim James Hallab
Journal:  SAS J       Date:  2009-12-01

4.  Hypersensitivity reactions to metal implants: laboratory options.

Authors:  Anna Maria Carossino; Christian Carulli; Simone Ciuffi; Roberto Carossino; Giorgia Donata Zappoli Thyrion; Roberto Zonefrati; Massimo Innocenti; Maria Luisa Brandi
Journal:  BMC Musculoskelet Disord       Date:  2016-11-23       Impact factor: 2.362

5.  Postmarket surveillance of 3D-printed implants for sacroiliac joint fusion.

Authors:  Daniel Cher; Kendrick Wroe; W Carlton Reckling; Scott Yerby
Journal:  Med Devices (Auckl)       Date:  2018-09-28

6.  Higher incidence of zinc and nickel hypersensitivity in patients with irritable bowel syndrome.

Authors:  Yasunari Kageyama; Koichi Aida; Kimihiko Kawauchi; Masafumi Morimoto; Tetsu Akiyama; Tsutomu Nakamura
Journal:  Immun Inflamm Dis       Date:  2019-10-24

7.  Th1 type lymphocyte reactivity to metals in patients with total hip arthroplasty.

Authors:  Nadim James Hallab; Marco Caicedo; Alison Finnegan; Joshua J Jacobs
Journal:  J Orthop Surg Res       Date:  2008-02-13       Impact factor: 2.359

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.