AIMS: To report two cases of allergic reaction to upper lid gold weight implants in patients with facial nerve palsy and to identify the use of pre-implantation patch testing in predicting gold hypersensitivity. METHODS: One patient who had a positive family history of gold allergy and had undergone previous gold dental restoration underwent patch testing with gold sodium thiosulphate. The gold weight from the same patient was analysed using scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive X-ray analysis, which can detect surface impurities. Tissue obtained during surgery to remove the gold weight from the second patient was examined histologically. RESULTS: Patch testing in the first patient gave a positive result. Analysis of the gold weight removed from the same patient confirmed 99.99% purity, and hence sensitivity to the gold itself was considered to be the cause of the inflammatory reaction. Histology of tissue taken from the eyelid of the second patient was consistent with type IV hypersensitivity. CONCLUSION: A personal and family history of gold allergy should be looked for before upper eyelid gold weight implantation. Patch testing should be performed for patients where there is doubt about whether gold has been the specific cause of previous allergic reactions, for patients who have undergone previous dental restoration involving gold, or if there is a positive family history of gold allergy.
AIMS: To report two cases of allergic reaction to upper lid gold weight implants in patients with facial nerve palsy and to identify the use of pre-implantation patch testing in predicting gold hypersensitivity. METHODS: One patient who had a positive family history of gold allergy and had undergone previous gold dental restoration underwent patch testing with gold sodium thiosulphate. The gold weight from the same patient was analysed using scanning electron microscopy and energy dispersive X-ray analysis, which can detect surface impurities. Tissue obtained during surgery to remove the gold weight from the second patient was examined histologically. RESULTS: Patch testing in the first patient gave a positive result. Analysis of the gold weight removed from the same patient confirmed 99.99% purity, and hence sensitivity to the gold itself was considered to be the cause of the inflammatory reaction. Histology of tissue taken from the eyelid of the second patient was consistent with type IV hypersensitivity. CONCLUSION: A personal and family history of gold allergy should be looked for before upper eyelid gold weight implantation. Patch testing should be performed for patients where there is doubt about whether gold has been the specific cause of previous allergic reactions, for patients who have undergone previous dental restoration involving gold, or if there is a positive family history of gold allergy.