Meena Syed1, Radhika Chopra2, Vinod Sachdev3. 1. Post Graduate Student, Department of Pedodontics, ITS-CDSR Centre for Dental studies and Research , Muradnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India . 2. Associate Professor, Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, ITS-CDSR Centre for Dental studies and Research , Muradnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India . 3. Professor, HOD and Principal, Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, ITS-CDSR Centre for Dental studies and Research , Muradnagar, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh, India .
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Utility of various dental materials ranging from diagnosis to rehabilitation for the management of oral diseases are not devoid of posing a potential risk of inducing allergic reactions to the patient, technician and dentist. This review aims to develop a systematic approach for the selection and monitoring of dental materials available in the market thereby giving an insight to predict their risk of inducing allergic reactions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our data included 71 relevant articles which included 60 case reports, 8 prospective studies and 3 retrospective studies. The source of these articles was Pub Med search done with the following terms: allergies to impression materials, sodium hypochlorite, Ledermix paste, zinc oxide eugenol, formaldehyde, Latex gloves, Methyl methacrylate, fissure sealant, composites, mercury, Nickel-chromium, Titanium, polishing paste and local anaesthesia. All the relevant articles and their references were analysed. The clinical manifestations of allergy to different dental materials based on different case reports were reviewed. RESULTS: After reviewing the literature, we found that the dental material reported to cause most adverse reactions in patients is amalgam and the incidence of oral lichenoid reactions adjacent to amalgam restorations occur more often than other dental materials. CONCLUSION: The most common allergic reactions in dental staff are allergies to latex, acrylates and formaldehyde. While polymethylmethacrylates and latex trigger delayed hypersensitivity reactions, sodium metabisulphite and nickel cause immediate reactions. Over the last few years, due to the rise in number of patients with allergies from different materials, the practicing dentists should have knowledge about documented allergies to known materials and thus avoid such allergic manifestations in the dental clinic.
INTRODUCTION: Utility of various dental materials ranging from diagnosis to rehabilitation for the management of oral diseases are not devoid of posing a potential risk of inducing allergic reactions to the patient, technician and dentist. This review aims to develop a systematic approach for the selection and monitoring of dental materials available in the market thereby giving an insight to predict their risk of inducing allergic reactions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Our data included 71 relevant articles which included 60 case reports, 8 prospective studies and 3 retrospective studies. The source of these articles was Pub Med search done with the following terms: allergies to impression materials, sodium hypochlorite, Ledermix paste, zinc oxide eugenol, formaldehyde, Latex gloves, Methyl methacrylate, fissure sealant, composites, mercury, Nickel-chromium, Titanium, polishing paste and local anaesthesia. All the relevant articles and their references were analysed. The clinical manifestations of allergy to different dental materials based on different case reports were reviewed. RESULTS: After reviewing the literature, we found that the dental material reported to cause most adverse reactions in patients is amalgam and the incidence of oral lichenoid reactions adjacent to amalgam restorations occur more often than other dental materials. CONCLUSION: The most common allergic reactions in dental staff are allergies to latex, acrylates and formaldehyde. While polymethylmethacrylates and latex trigger delayed hypersensitivity reactions, sodium metabisulphite and nickel cause immediate reactions. Over the last few years, due to the rise in number of patients with allergies from different materials, the practicing dentists should have knowledge about documented allergies to known materials and thus avoid such allergic manifestations in the dental clinic.
Authors: J C Baluga; R Casamayou; E Carozzi; N López; R Anale; R Borges; E Alvarez; C Baez; C Cedrés; C Guelfi; H Larrosa; R Sassi; Y Polero Journal: Allergol Immunopathol (Madr) Date: 2002 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 1.667
Authors: Anabela Paula; Eunice Carrilho; Mafalda Laranjo; Ana M Abrantes; João Casalta-Lopes; Maria Filomena Botelho; Carlos Miguel Marto; Manuel M Ferreira Journal: Materials (Basel) Date: 2019-10-16 Impact factor: 3.623