Literature DB >> 28043850

Allergies in orthopaedic and trauma surgery.

C H Lohmann1, R Hameister2, G Singh3.   

Abstract

Hypersensitivity reactions to implants in orthopaedic and trauma surgery are a rare but devastating complication. They are considered as a delayed-type of hypersensitivity reaction (type IV), characterized by an antigen activation of sensitized T-lymphocytes releasing various cytokines and may result in osteoclast activation and bone resorption. Potential haptens are originated from metal alloys or bone-cement. A meta-analysis has confirmed a higher probability of developing a metal hypersensitivity postoperatively and noted a greater risk of failed replacements compared to stable implants. Hypersensitivity to implants may present with a variety of symptoms such as pain, joint effusion, delayed wound/bone healing, persistent secretion, allergic dermatitis (localized or systemic), clicking noises, loss of joint function, instability and failure of the implant. Various diagnostic options have been offered, including patch testing, metal alloy patch testing, histology, lymphocyte transformation test (LTT), memory lymphocyte immunostimulation assay (MELISA), leukocyte migration inhibition test (LIF) and lymphocyte activation test (LAT). No significant differences between in vivo and in vitro methods have been found. Due to unconvincing evidence for screening methods, predictive tests are not recommended for routine performance. Infectious aetiology always needs to be excluded. As there is a lack of evidence on large-scale studies with regards to the optimal treatment option, management currently relies on individual case-by-case decisions. Several options for patients with (suspected) metal-related hypersensitivity exist and may include materials based on ceramic, titanium or oxinium or modified surfaces. Promising results have been reported, but long-term experience is lacking. More large-scaled studies are needed in this context. In patients with bone-cement hypersensitivity, the component suspected for hypersensitivity should be avoided. The development of (predictive) biomarkers is considered as a major contribution for the future.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Arthroplasty; Hypersensitivity reaction; Implant material

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 28043850     DOI: 10.1016/j.otsr.2016.06.021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Orthop Traumatol Surg Res        ISSN: 1877-0568            Impact factor:   2.256


  3 in total

1.  A case series of cementless revision total knee arthroplasty in patients with benzoyl peroxide allergy.

Authors:  Frank S Fröschen; Nadine Gravius; Jan-Frederic Lau; Thomas Martin Randau; Eva Kaup; Max J Friedrich; Sascha Gravius
Journal:  Int Orthop       Date:  2018-12-11       Impact factor: 3.075

Review 2.  Fatigue Crack Growth and Fracture of Internal Fixation Materials in In Vivo Environments-A Review.

Authors:  Kailun Wu; Bin Li; Jiong Jiong Guo
Journal:  Materials (Basel)       Date:  2021-01-01       Impact factor: 3.623

3.  Delayed Hypersensitivity Reaction to Titanium-coated Polypropylene Mesh in Breast Reconstruction.

Authors:  Eva Jouve; Françoise Giordano-Labadie; Gabrielle Selmes; Marc Soule-Tholy; Anne-Sophie Navarro; Dimitri Gangloff; Thomas Meresse; Raphaelle Duprez-Paumier; Emilie Tournier; Charlotte Vaysse
Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg Glob Open       Date:  2022-04-14
  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.