Hypersensitivity reactions to metallic implants - diagnostic algorithm and suggested patch test series for clinical use

Rare Systemic Response to Titanium Spinal Fusion Implant: Case Report

Neurosurgical patients with titanium spinal implant hypersensitivity can be difficult to diagnosis due to its rarity. Suspicion for titanium allergy is generally localized to the hardware site and may initially be thought to be an infectious process. Patients who report anorexia and fatigue over a long duration after the initial post-operative period may be diagnosed with depression rather than a systemic response to spinal metallic instrumentation. To our knowledge, a systemic titanium hypersensitivity reaction to spinal fixation devices has not been reported in the literature. We offer this report to give spine surgeons additional insight into suspected systemic titanium hypersensitivity symptoms which, if remain unidentified, can severely impair patient outcomes. A 67-year-old female with an unreported nickel allergy developed severe debilitating anorexia and fatigue one month post operatively, secondary to minimally invasive thoracic spinal fixation for T11 burst fracture with disruption of posterior elements. Over a two year period, weight loss reached approximately 25 kilograms with loss of muscle mass and subcutaneous tissue surrounding the spinal implants. The screws and rods were removed to avoid skin erosion. Upon hardware removal, the patient had rapid weight gain, improved stamina and generalized sense of well-being. We recommend the removal of spinal hardware in patients with suspected systemic titanium hypersensitivity reaction.

The effect of patient-reported metal allergies on the outcomes of shoulder arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Although literature exists regarding hip and knee arthroplasty outcomes in patients with skin allergy to metals, there is minimal information about skin allergy implications on shoulder arthroplasty outcomes. The purpose of this study was to determine the results, complications, and failure rate among patients with a self-reported metal allergy undergoing shoulder arthroplasty.

METHODS

Fifty-two shoulder arthroplasties were performed at our Institution in 43 patients with self-reported metal allergies. Forty primary and 12 revision shoulder arthroplasties were performed using anatomic (30) and reverse (22) components. Retrospective chart review was performed to determine metal allergy history, implant composition, pain, motion, and complications. Radiographs were reviewed to determine mechanical failure rates. Average follow-up time was 65 months.

RESULTS

Allergies reported included nickel (37), cobalt chrome (4), copper (2), zinc (1), titanium (1), gold (1), and nonspecific metal allergy (8); 8 patients reported multiple metal allergies. All components implanted in patients with nickel allergies contained nickel. At most recent follow-up, pain was rated as none or mild in 88% of shoulders. Active elevation improved from 80° to 141° and external rotation from 24° to 52°. Two revisions were performed for glenoid loosening (3.8%); both were revision cases with substantial glenoid bone loss. One patient with mild pain had a radiographically loose glenoid component 12 years after anatomic shoulder arthroplasty.

CONCLUSION

Results from this study suggest that shoulder arthroplasty in patients with self-reported metal allergy provides satisfactory pain relief and improved range of motion with low revision rates.

Two-Stage Revision Total Knee Arthroplasty for Suspected Periprosthetic Joint Infection and Metal and Bone Cement Hypersensitivity

Hypersensitivity to implant components and periprosthetic joint infection should be detected before all revision arthroplasty, as misdiagnosis can lead to replacement loosening and the need for further revision procedures. We describe the case of a 69-year-old woman presenting a history of a painful cemented total knee replacement. Postoperative investigations showed loosening of X-ray components, suspected periprosthetic joint infection, and patch test hypersensitivity to nickel sulfate and methyl methacrylate. Two months later, a more specific patch test indicated non-allergy to the solid scratch of one bone cement. The patient underwent a two-stage revision with prosthesis removal and the temporary application of a specific cement spacer followed by the successful reimplantation of a cemented revision prosthesis. All candidates for the revision arthroplasty procedure must be investigated for hypersensitivity to metal and bone cement in order to avoid complications related to prosthesis intolerance and the need for further revision surgery; in the presence of hypersensitivity to bone cement and periprosthetic joint infection with a two-stage revision indication, the patient must be submitted to further patch tests with scratches of solid bone cement.

On the Future Design of Bio-Inspired Polyetheretherketone Dental Implants

Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is a promising implant material because of its excellent mechanical characteristics. Although this polymer is a standard material in spinal applications, PEEK is not in use in the manufacturing of dental implants, where titanium is still the most-used material. This may be caused by its relative bio-inertness. By the use of various surface modification techniques, efforts have been made to enhance its osseointegrative characteristics to enable the polymer to be used in dentistry. In this feature paper, the state-of-the-art for dental implants is given and different surface modification techniques of PEEK are discussed. The focus will lie on a covalently attached surface layer mimicking natural bone. The usage of such covalently anchored biomimetic composite materials combines many advantageous properties: A biocompatible organic matrix and a mineral component provide the cells with a surrounding close to natural bone. Bone-related cells may not recognize the implant as a foreign body and therefore, may heal and integrate faster and more firmly. Because neither metal-based nor ceramics are ideal material candidates for a dental implant, the combination of PEEK and a covalently anchored mineralized biopolymer layer may be the start of the desired evolution in dental surgery.

Cytotoxicity and oxidative stress induced by nickel and titanium ions from dental alloys on cells of gastrointestinal tract

The aim was to explore the biological effect of nickel (Ni) and titanium (Ti) ions released from dental alloys. NiTi alloy were exposed to 40 mL of artificial saliva (pH = 4.8, t = 37 °C). The dynamics of Ni and Ti ions release during corrosion were recorded on the 3th, 7th and 14th day. Biological effect of Ni and Ti ions released from alloy was explored on cell lines of human tongue CAL 27, liver Hep G2 and colon Caco-2. Neutral Red uptake assay for the estimation of cell viability/cytotoxicity and 2',7'-dichlorofluorescein diacetate fluorimetric assay for reactive oxygen species were used. Cells were exposed to the following concentration of corrosion products: 5.0×, 1.0×, 0.5 and 0.1× during the period of 24, 48 and 72 h. To check the effect of each metal separately, cells were exposed to nickel-chloride and titanium-dioxide of corresponding concentration. The release of Ni is higher than of Ti (15.1-30.4 μg/L for Ni and 9.0-17.3 μg/L for Ti, respectively) and 5× higher concentrations are needed to induce cytotoxic effect. Ni and Ti ions alone do not induce a major cytotoxic effect, but their combination does indicating their synergistic effect. Increase in concentration of Ni and Ti tends to increase cytotoxicity, Ti more than Ni. Cytotoxicity and induction of free radicals are in strong positive linear correlation. Ions released from NiTi alloy during 14 days do not induce significant cytotoxic effect and would not have a clinically important impact. Cytotoxic effect is largely the result of the induction of free radicals.

Increased risk of eczema after joint replacement: A population-based retrospective cohort study

There are very few reports of eczema and other prosthetic-related allergic skin complications following arthroplasty. We aimed to assess the risk of eczema after joint replacement.We performed a retrospective population-based cohort study in 2024 joint replacement patients using the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database. For comparison, 8096 controls were selected, with 4 control subjects for each joint replacement patient matched for age, sex, and index year, to assess eczema risk. We examined 14-year cumulative eczema incidence associated with age, sex, immunity, disease history, and joint replacement location.Eczema rates in the joint replacement patients were 38% higher than in the control group (57.90 vs 41.84 per 1000 person-years, respectively). Compared with the control group, joint replacement patients showed a 1.35-fold increased risk of eczema according to the multivariable Cox model (95% Confidence interval [CI] = 1.23-1.49). Knee replacement patients had higher eczema risk compared with the control group (Hazard ratio [HR] = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.33-1.70). Stratified by study period, the joint replacement cohort had a higher eczema risk after the 3-month follow-up.Our study revealed that joint arthroplasty increased risk of eczema in this 14-year follow-up study, and this was not related to personal atopic history or gender.

Delayed Intracranial Parenchymal Changes After Aneurysmal Coil Embolization Procedures for Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms

BACKGROUND

With the recent advances in endovascular treatment devices, it has become standard in wide-neck or large intracranial aneurysms to perform coil embolization with adjunctive techniques. However, device-related perioperative complications have been reported because of the use of more complex systems.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate patients who developed multiple parenchymal lesions after undergoing coil embolization for treating an unruptured intracranial aneurysm.

METHODS

This study investigated 305 consecutive patients who underwent coil embolization of unruptured intracranial aneurysms between 2015 and 2017. Delayed inflammatory changes referred to the delayed observation of multiple cerebral white matter lesions on follow-up magnetic resonance imaging at an area corresponding to the perfused area of the treatment target vessel. The timing and pattern of onset, device used, the combined use of adjunctive techniques, and the clinical course after steroid treatment were retrospectively investigated.

RESULTS

The 7 patients (2.3%) who showed delayed inflammatory changes were all women with a mean age of 59 yr. A mean duration from treatment to onset was 28 d. Symptoms were convulsions in 3 patients, hemiplegia in 2 patients, and homonymous hemianopia in 1 patient. All 7 patients were treated with adjunctive technique including stents, double catheter method, and balloon assist. Response to steroid treatment was satisfactory both clinically and on imaging in all 7 patients. Skin patch test was positive for nickel allergy in 2 patients.

CONCLUSION

Clinicians must be fully aware of symptomatic delayed inflammatory changes may occur after endovascular aneurysmal treatment with the use of various devices.

Utility of Patch Testing and Lymphocyte Transformation Testing in the Evaluation of Metal Allergy in Patients with Orthopedic Implants

Total joint arthroplasties are increasingly common orthopedic procedures performed throughout the United States. Implant failure after these procedures occurs due to a number of causes such as infection or mechanical problems, with metal hypersensitivity being an area of growing interest. The nature and mechanism of a causative relationship between metal hypersensitivity and implant failure have been unclear as it is not known whether implant failure occurs due to a previous metal allergy or metal allergy results from secondary sensitization via metal exposure in existing failing implants. Overall, there appears to be growing support and evidence for metal-hypersensitive patients having worse outcomes with regard to total hip and knee arthroplasties. However, there are conflicting recommendations (outside of Nuss procedures) for pre-implant testing for metal hypersensitivity as testing has not consistently been shown to change patient outcomes.

Improved outcomes in patients with positive metal sensitivity following revision total knee arthroplasty

Background

Metal sensitivity as a cause for painful joint replacement has become increasingly prevalent; however, there is a lack of reported clinical outcome data from total knee arthroplasty patients with metal allergies. The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients presenting with a painful total knee arthroplasty with a positive metal sensitivity have improved outcomes following revision to a hypoallergenic implant.

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted for patients that underwent a revision total knee arthroplasty after metal sensitivity testing over a 3-year period from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2017. Based on the results of sensitivity testing, patients underwent revision total knee arthroplasty to a hypoallergenic component or a standard component. Following revision, patients returned to the clinic at an interval of 6 weeks, 5 months, and 12 months for functional, pain, and satisfaction assessment. Outcomes were compared within and between sensitivity groups.

Results

Of the included patients, 78.3% (39/46) were positive for metal sensitivity. The most common metal sensitivity was to nickel (79.5%, 32/39). Both non-reactive and reactive patients significantly improved in range of motion after revision arthroplasty. The reactive group saw a 37.8% decrease in pain at 6 weeks post-revision (p < 0.001) Whereas, the non-reactive group only saw a moderate, non-significant improvement in pain reduction at 6 weeks post-revision (27.0%; p = 0.29). Frequency of pain experienced did not vary significantly between groups. Maximum metal lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) sensitivity score did not correlate with pain level at the time of revision (R² = 0.02, p = 0.38) or percent improvement after revision (R² = 0.001, p = 0.81). Overall, all patients reported being very satisfied after revision total knee arthroplasty; there was no difference between positive and negative sensitivity groups (W = 62, p = 0.89).

Conclusions

Patients presenting with a painful knee arthroplasty and positive metal LTT have improved pain scores, walking function, and range of motion following revision to a hypoallergenic component. This study also provides a treatment algorithm for patients presenting with a painful knee replacement, in order to provide effective and timely diagnosis and management.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13018-019-1228-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Allergy in total knee replacement surgery: Is it a real problem?

Total knee arthroplasty is a common procedure, with extremely good clinical results. Despite this success, it produces 20% unsatisfactory results. Among the causes of these failures is metal hypersensitivity. Metal sensitization is higher in patients with a knee arthroplasty than in the general population and is even higher in patients undergoing revision surgery. However, a clear correlation between metal sensitization and symptomatic knee after surgery has not been ascertained. Surely, patients with a clear history of metal allergy must be carefully examined through dermatological and laboratory testing before surgery. There is no globally accepted diagnostic algorithm or laboratory test to diagnose metal hypersensitivity or metal reactions. The patch test is the most common test to determine metal hypersensitivity, though presenting some limitations. Several laboratory assays have been developed, with a higher sensitivity compared to patch testing, yet their clinical availability is not widespread, due to high costs and technical complexity. Symptoms of a reaction to metal implants present across a wide spectrum, ranging from pain and cutaneous dermatitis to aseptic loosening of the arthroplasty. However, although cutaneous and systemic hypersensitivity reactions to metals have arisen, thereby increasing concern after joint arthroplasties, allergies against implant materials remain quite rare and not a well-known problem. The aim of the following paper is to provide an overview on diagnosis and management of metal hypersensitivity in patients who undergo a total knee arthroplasty in order clarify its real importance.

PEEK materials as an alternative to titanium in dental implants: A systematic review

PURPOSE

Evaluation of the available research on PEEK materials to find that whether PEEK material has favorable properties and can enhance osseointegration, so that they can be utilize as implants material.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An electronic and structured systematic search was undertaken in May 2018, without any restrictions of time in the Medline/Pubmed, Sci-hub, Ebscohost, Cochrane, and Web of Science databases. To identify other related references further hand search was done. Articles related to PEEK and their applications in implants were only included. Articles not available in abstract form and article other than English language were excluded.

RESULTS

Initially, the search resulted in 153 papers. Independent screenings of the abstracts were done by the reviewers to identify the articles related to the question in focus. Sixty-two studies were selected out of which 10 were further excluded due to not in English language. Two additional papers were obtained after hand searching, and finally 54 articles were included in the review.

CONCLUSIONS

Surface modification of PEEK seems to enhance the cell adhesion, proliferation, biocompability, and osteogenic properties of PEEK implant materials. PEEK had also influence the biofilm structure and reduces the chances of periimplant inflammations. Further research and more number of controlled clinical trials on PEEK implant is required in near future so that it can replace titanium in future.

Metal allergy patient treated by titanium implant denture: A case report with at least 4-year follow-up

Patch testing with metal reagents was positive on female patient with history of metal hypersensitivity after dental treatment. All of the dental restorations with metal components were removed, and subsequent oral rehabilitation utilizing dental implants and metal-free prostheses was carried out. The treatments alleviate the presenting signs and symptoms.

Patch Testing for the Evaluation of Metal Hypersensitivity in the Nuss Procedure

The Nuss procedure has become the predominant reason for the use of metal implants by pediatric general and thoracic surgeons. Current guidelines recommend preimplant testing for all patients undergoing the Nuss procedure, which differs from the guidelines for all other orthopedic procedures. This review was done to further evaluate this discrepancy.

Metal allergy in total-joint arthroplasty: Case report and literature review

RATIONALE

Due to the low incidence and lack of effective diagnostic measures for the diagnosis of metal allergy in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA), diagnosis relies mainly on the exclusion of other causes, in particular infection. It remains a relatively unpredictable and poorly understood cause of implant failure. At present, skin patch testing, leukocyte migration inhibition test (LMIT) and lymphocyte transformation tests (LTT) are being commonly used to assess metal hypersensitivity.This report presents both a case and literature review.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 61-year-old female patient experienced continuous swelling and pain in the right knee joint for 9 months after a right-side total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

DIAGNOSES

We believe this is the case report of metal allergy in TKA. The following were the reasons for this. First, no definite symptoms of infection during revision arthroplasty were observed, but with obvious hyperplasia of synovium. Furthermore, a frozen biopsy revealed an extremely low neutrophil count, which was considered to be caused by chronic inflammation. Second, the results of repeated post-operation reexaminations indicate a clear increase in the number of eosinophils, while no bacteria were found in the tissue bacterial smear performed during the operation. Third, improvements were clearly observed in the patient following synovectomy, revision of the polyethylene insert and anti-anaphylactic treatment.

INTERVENTIONS

The patient underwent synovectomy, revision of the polyethylene insert and anti-anaphylactic treatment.

OUTCOMES

The patient's right knee remained mildly swollen; however, the pain has been relieved significantly. The range of motion could achieve 0 degrees of extension and 90 degrees of flexion.

LESSONS

No consensus has been reached about the best diagnostic criteria for this disease, and most physicians would consider it to be a possibility when other diseases including periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) have been excluded. Although this case followed the same course, the outcome following synovectomy and anti-anaphylactic treatment further confirmed our hypothesis.

Severe Metal Hypersensitivity Following Internal Fixation of an Ankle Fracture: A Case Report

CASE

A 67-year-old woman underwent internal fixation of an ankle fracture. Ten days postoperatively, the patient developed systemic hives, difficulty breathing, and oral swelling. At 8 weeks postoperatively, the hardware was removed because of a suspected metal hypersensitivity. Despite experiencing perioral edema and difficulty breathing after the hardware removal, she had complete resolution of the symptoms at the 2-week, 6-week, and 12-month follow-up appointments.

CONCLUSION

Hypersensitivities to metal-based implants can develop and cause local and systemic reactions. Orthopaedic surgeons should inquire about a history of metal allergies, and possibly perform allergy testing for patients with a history suggestive of metal hypersensitivities. Consideration should be given for hospital admission following hardware removal for patient monitoring.

Metal Hypersensitivity and Orthopedic Implants: Survey of Orthopedic Surgeons

BACKGROUND

There is no clear consensus among orthopedic surgeons concerning metal hypersensitivity screening and orthopedic implants.

OBJECTIVE

This study investigated practices and opinions about metal hypersensitivity and orthopedic implants via a survey administered to practicing orthopedists.

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to members of the Pennsylvania Orthopaedic Society electronically. Respondents were asked about preoperative and postoperative screening habits concerning metal hypersensitivity and implants.

RESULTS

Forty-four physicians completed the survey. Only 11% of respondents reported that they always or often screen patients for metal hypersensitivity. Fifty percent of respondents stated that they only rarely refer patients for patch testing (and the remainder never do). If, however, patients were found to have a positive patch test, most providers were very likely to use a different implant. Other respondents were skeptical of the relationship between metal hypersensitivity and implant failure. Dermatitis, pain, and loosening were common reasons for postoperative testing. Seventy percent of respondents said that patch testing rarely or never changed their decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

This study is reflective of the lack of consensus between orthopedists regarding patch testing. It demonstrates the diversity of opinions among orthopedists, the need for additional dialogue between orthopedic and dermatology specialties, and the need for larger studies investigating outcomes and metal hypersensitivity.

Metal hypersensitivity in patients with orthopaedic implant complications-A retrospective clinical study

BACKGROUND

Hypersensitivity to metals as a cause of implant-related complications has been a subject of controversy. Projections indicate an increase in the frequency of joint replacements of between 300% and 600% by the year 2030; therefore, this issue is of considerable interest.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate sensitization to implant materials in patients with implant-related complications, to identify allergens, and to clarify whether hypersensitivity is a relevant cause.

METHODS

Patients with implant-related complications or a positive history of contact allergy and planned total joint replacements referred for allergological investigation between 2004 and 2017 were retrospectively analysed.

RESULTS

In total, 311 patients were included. A positive patch test reaction to a metal was seen in 64.4% of preoperative patients and in 54.6% of patients with implant-related complications. Common alloy metals such as cobalt, chromium and titanium gave positive reactions in up to 2.9% of patients with implant-related complications. None of the patients with skin changes had a positive patch test reaction to an implant metal.

CONCLUSION

Other factors, such as the type of replaced joint and mechanical stress, seem to be more relevant for implant-related complications. Sensitization to metals or other materials seems to rarely play a role, and is overestimated.

Patch Testing for Evaluation of Hypersensitivity to Implanted Metal Devices: A Perspective From the American Contact Dermatitis Society

The American Contact Dermatitis Society recognizes the interest in the evaluation and management of metal hypersensitivity reactions. Given the paucity of robust evidence with which to guide our practices, we provide reasonable evidence and expert opinion-based guidelines for clinicians with regard to metal hypersensitivity reaction testing and patient management. Routine preoperative evaluation in individuals with no history of adverse cutaneous reactions to metals or history of previous implant-related adverse events is not necessary. Patients with a clear self-reported history of metal reactions should be evaluated by patch testing before device implant. Patch testing is only 1 element in the assessment of causation in those with postimplantation morbidity. Metal exposure from the implanted device can cause sensitization, but a positive metal test does not prove symptom causality. The decision to replace an implanted device must include an assessment of all clinical factors and a thorough risk-benefit analysis by the treating physician(s) and patient.

Deep brain stimulation: custom-made silicone-coated pulse-generator implantation after allergic reaction to generator compounds

Deep brain stimulation for Parkinson's disease has become an established treatment option in recent years. The method and its application in clinical practice has proved to be safe and effective. Nevertheless, procedure-related and hardware-related complications occur. We present a rare case of a patient with an allergic reaction to the impulse generator. The patient suffered from delayed wound-healing deficits with several wound revisions and generator repositionings. After diagnosis of an allergic reaction to components of the generator, a custom-made silicon-coated model was implanted. Hereafter, no wound healing-deficit occurred throughout long-term follow-up. Allergic reaction to hardware components may lead to wound-healing deficits. In such cases, custom-made silicon-coated models may be an effective treatment option.

Metal hypersensitivity in total hip and knee arthroplasty: Current concepts

Metal hypersensitivity (MHS) is a rare complication of total joint arthroplasty that has been linked to prosthetic device failure when other potential causes have been ruled out. The purpose of this review was to conduct an analysis of existing literature in order to get a better understanding of the pathophysiology, presentation, diagnosis, and management of MHS. It has been described as a type IV hypersensitivity reaction to the metals comprising prosthetic implants, often nickel and cobalt-chromium. Patients suffering from this condition have reported periprosthetic joint pain and swelling as well as cutaneous, eczematous dermatitis. There is no standard for diagnosis MHS, but tests such as patch testing and lymphocyte transformation testing have demonstrated utility, among others. Treatment options that have demonstrated success include administration of steroids and revision surgery, in which the existing metal implant is replaced with one of less allergenic materials. Moreover, the definitive resolution of symptoms has most commonly required revision surgery with the use of different implants. However, more studies are needed in order to understand the complexity of this subject.

PEEK with Reinforced Materials and Modifications for Dental Implant Applications

Polyetheretherketone (PEEK) is a semi-crystalline linear polycyclic thermoplastic that has been proposed as a substitute for metals in biomaterials. PEEK can also be applied to dental implant materials as a superstructure, implant abutment, or implant body. This article summarizes the current research on PEEK applications in dental implants, especially for the improvement of PEEK surface and body modifications. Although various benchmark reports on the reinforcement and surface modifications of PEEK are available, few clinical trials using PEEK for dental implant bodies have been published. Controlled clinical trials, especially for the use of PEEK in implant abutment and implant bodies, are necessary.

Allergic or Hypersensitivity Reactions to Orthopaedic Implants

Allergic or hypersensitivity reactions to orthopaedic implants can pose diagnostic and therapeutic challenges. Although 10% to 15% of the population exhibits cutaneous sensitivity to metals, deep-tissue reactions to metal implants are comparatively rare. Nevertheless, the link between cutaneous sensitivity and clinically relevant deep-tissue reactions is unclear. Most reactions to orthopaedic devices are type IV, or delayed-type hypersensitivity reactions. The most commonly implicated allergens are nickel, cobalt, and chromium; however, reactions to nonmetal compounds, such as polymethyl methacrylate, antibiotic spacers, and suture materials, have also been reported. Symptoms of hypersensitivity to implants are nonspecific and include pain, swelling, stiffness, and localized skin reactions. Following arthroplasty, internal fixation, or implantation of similarly allergenic devices, the persistence or early reappearance of inflammatory symptoms should raise suspicions for hypersensitivity. However, hypersensitivity is a diagnosis of exclusion. Infection, as well as aseptic loosening, particulate synovitis, instability, and other causes of failure must first be eliminated.

Making Sense of Metal Allergy and Hypersensitivity to Metallic Implants in Relation to Hand Surgery

All metals implanted into a biological system undergo some degree of corrosion depending upon its composition. The electrochemical process of corrosion produces free metal ions, which may activate the host's immune system through a variety of mechanisms. Whereas dermal metal hypersensitivity is common, affecting 10% to 15% of the population, the immune reaction from implanted metals is much less common (< 0.1%), but has been associated with metal allergy and hypersensitivity producing a multitude of patient symptoms. Superficial symptoms may be mild to severe forms of dermatitis, urticaria, pruritus, and vasculitis, whereas deep sequelae include metallosis-related pseudotumor, implant loosening, and joint stiffness. Currently, there are clinical tests to evaluate patients for metal hypersensitivity, but there is little agreement regarding the ideal timing and clinical situation prompting the work-up of a patient for a metal allergy or hypersensitivity. An understanding of the epidemiology, etiology, basic science, diagnostic testing, and treatment of patients with suspected metal allergy, as it pertains to the current literature, will aid orthopedic and plastic surgeons of all subspecialties in the management of patients requiring metallic implants.

Hypersensitivity to Orthopedic Implants: A Review of the Literature

Awareness of rare etiologies for implant failure is becoming increasingly important. In addition to the overall increase in joint arthroplasties, revision surgeries are projected to increase dramatically in the coming years, with volume increasing up to seven-fold between 2005 and 2030. The literature regarding the relationship between metal allergy and implant failure is controversial. It has proven difficult to determine whether sensitization is a cause or a consequence of implant failure. Testing patients with functional implants is not a clinically useful approach, as the rate of hypersensitivity is higher in implant recipients than in the general population, regardless of the status of the implant. As a result of the ineffectiveness of preoperative patch testing for predicting adverse outcomes, as well as the high cost of implementing such patch testing as standard procedure, most orthopedists and dermatologists agree that an alternative prosthesis should only be considered for patients with a history of allergy to a metal in the standard implant. In patients with a failed implant requiring revision surgery, hypersensitivity to an implant component should be considered in the differential diagnosis. Because a metal allergy to implant components is currently not commonly considered in the differential for joint failure in the orthopedic literature, there should be improved communication and collaboration between orthopedists and dermatologists when evaluating joint replacement patients with a presentation suggestive of allergy.

Females with Unexplained Joint Pain Following Total Joint Arthroplasty Exhibit a Higher Rate and Severity of Hypersensitivity to Implant Metals Compared with Males: Implications of Sex-Based Bioreactivity Differences

BACKGROUND

Recent studies indicate that females demonstrate an increased risk of experiencing adverse local tissue reactions, aseptic loosening, and revision after primary metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty compared with males; the underlying biological mechanisms responsible for sex discrepancies in implant failure remain unclear. In addition to anatomical and biomechanical sex differences, there may be inherent immunological disparities that predispose females to more aggressive adaptive immune reactivity to implant debris, i.e., metal sensitivity.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, we analyzed sex-associated rates and levels of metal sensitization in 1,038 male and 1,575 female subjects with idiopathic joint pain following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) who were referred for in vitro metal-sensitivity testing.

RESULTS

Females demonstrated a significantly higher rate and severity of metal sensitization compared with males. The median lymphocyte stimulation index (SI) among males was 2.8 (mean, 5.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.9 to 6.0) compared with 3.5 (mean, 8.2; 95% CI, 7.4 to 9.0) among females (p < 0.05). Forty-nine percent of females had an SI of ≥4 (reactive) compared with 38% of males, and the implant-related level of pain was also significantly (p < 0.0001) higher among females (mean, 6.8; 95% CI, 6.6 to 6.9) compared with males (mean, 6.1; 95% CI, 6.0 to 6.3).

CONCLUSIONS

In a select group of patients who had joint pain following TJA and no evidence of infection and who were referred for metal-sensitivity testing, females exhibited a higher level of pain and demonstrated a higher rate and severity (as measured by lymphocyte SI) of metal sensitization compared with males.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Surgery-Related Contact Dermatitis: A Review of Potential Irritants and Allergens

Surgical procedures utilize an increasing number of medical products including antiseptics, anesthetics, gloves, suture materials, tissue adhesives, topical antibiotics, and bandages. Many of these products have irritant potential. Allergic contact dermatitis has also been reported. This review covers preoperative, operative, and postoperative exposures that may result in contact dermatitis. Testing with standard patch panels such as T.R.U.E. Test and the North American Contact Dermatitis Group 65 allergen series does not evaluate for all relevant contactants. A thorough understanding of potential exposures is vital to effectively evaluate a patient with surgery-related contact dermatitis. A systematic approach is needed to ensure that standard patch panels and supplementary patches adequately address each encountered contactant.

Severe generalized dermatitis in a nickel-allergic patient with a popliteal artery nitinol stent

We present the case of a patient who developed a full-body desquamating macular-papular, pruritic rash after endovascular placement of a popliteal artery nitinol stent for acute limb ischemia. The rash was resistant to high-dose steroid and immunosuppressive treatment and intensive topical treatment. Patch testing revealed nickel allergy. The stented arterial segment was removed, with significant improvement in his symptoms that allowed the cessation of prednisone and topical treatments. The epidemiology, pathophysiology, and clinical effect of nickel allergy are discussed in addition to the use of nickel-alloy stents.

Metal Hypersensitivity Reactions to Orthopedic Implants

Total hip and knee replacement surgery using metal alloy devices is common. Type IV allergic reactions to these implants occur, though infrequently. While uncommon, peri-implant metal allergic reactions may cause significant morbidity for the affected individual-including aseptic loosening, pseudotumor formation and frank device failure. It is challenging to predict who will have these reactions, even in those with established pre-implant metal allergy. At this time, the scientific literature clearly supports few conclusions. Despite this, we believe several conclusions can be made: routine pre-implant testing in asymptomatic individuals is not indicated; listen to patient's concerns about metal allergy if the concern arises; patch testing is probably the best pre- and post-implant screening test; post-implantation testing is controversial and even positive LTT or patch test does not definitively diagnose morbidity from a metal allergy; and complete recovery following revision placement of an immunologically inert device is diagnostic. More research is needed to scientifically approach this issue.

Nickel-associated delayed multiple white matter lesions after stent-assisted coil embolization of intracranial unruptured aneurysm

Metal-induced encephalopathy after stent-assisted coil embolization is extremely rare. The present report describes two patients who presented with symptomatic intracranial parenchymal edematous lesions after stent-assisted coil embolization. A 64-year-old woman underwent stent-assisted coil embolization for a left internal carotid artery aneurysm; 21 days after the procedure she presented with right hand weakness and MRI revealed multifocal white matter lesions. Another woman aged 52 years underwent stent-assisted coil embolization for right vertebral artery aneurysm; 18 days after the procedure she presented with left-sided sensory disturbance and MRI demonstrated multiple white matter lesions. Treatment in both cases resulted in improvement of these lesions after steroid pulse therapy, and the patients had no associated morbidity 4 months after the procedures. Clinicians should monitor for neurologic symptoms and postoperative delayed radiologic parenchymal edematous changes associated with the metal allergic reaction after nitinol stent-assisted coil embolization.

Nickel-associated delayed multiple white matter lesions after stent-assisted coil embolization of intracranial unruptured aneurysm

Metal-induced encephalopathy after stent-assisted coil embolization is extremely rare. The present report describes two patients who presented with symptomatic intracranial parenchymal edematous lesions after stent-assisted coil embolization. A 64-year-old woman underwent stent-assisted coil embolization for a left internal carotid artery aneurysm; 21 days after the procedure she presented with right hand weakness and MRI revealed multifocal white matter lesions. Another woman aged 52 years underwent stent-assisted coil embolization for right vertebral artery aneurysm; 18 days after the procedure she presented with left-sided sensory disturbance and MRI demonstrated multiple white matter lesions. Treatment in both cases resulted in improvement of these lesions after steroid pulse therapy, and the patients had no associated morbidity 4 months after the procedures. Clinicians should monitor for neurologic symptoms and postoperative delayed radiologic parenchymal edematous changes associated with the metal allergic reaction after nitinol stent-assisted coil embolization.

Allergy in Total Knee Replacement. Does It Exist?: Review Article

BACKGROUND

There is little data on whether preexisting allergies to implant materials and bone cement have an impact on the outcome of TKA.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

This review article analyzes the current literature to evaluate the prevalence and importance of metal and cement allergies for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed using the following search criteria: "knee," "arthroplasty," and "allergy" as well as "knee," "arthroplasty," and "hypersensitivity."

RESULTS

One hundred sixteen articles were identified on PubMed, Seventy articles could be excluded by reviewing the title and abstract leaving 46 articles to be included for this review. The majority of the studies cited patch testing as the gold standard for screening and diagnosis of hypersensitivity following TKA. There is consensus that patients with self-reported allergies against metals or bone cement and positive patch test should be treated with hypoallergenic materials or cementless TKA. Treatment options include the following: coated titanium or cobalt-chromium implants, ceramic, or zirconium oxide implants.

CONCLUSION

Allergies against implant materials and bone cement are rare. Patch testing is recommended for patients with self-reported allergies. The use of special implants is recommended for patients with a confirmed allergy.

High-Performance Polymers and Their Potential Application as Medical and Oral Implant Materials: A Review

PURPOSE

To review the literature on high-performance polymeric (HPP) materials used as medical and oral implants and make comparisons with the commonly used titanium.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Original scientific articles published in English in MEDLINE (PubMed-NCBI) and Picarta literature databases between January 01, 1995 and June 01, 2013 were included in this review. Additional information was derived from scientific reports, medical and chemical textbooks, handbooks, product information, manufacturers' instructions, and Internet web sites of the manufacturers.

RESULTS

Based on the 7 animal studies and 1 clinical study, HPP polyetheretherketone (PEEK) consisting of a single monomer and featuring a low Young modulus may be advantageous. PEEK seems to lead to less osteolyses and healing problems and no scattering in radiation was observed. Some animal studies showed direct contact between PEEK and the bone with high biocompatibility and no evidence for cytotoxicity, mutagenicity, carcinogenicity, and immunogenicity to the present day.

CONCLUSION

The HPPs (ie, PEEK) may carry some potential to be an alternative material for titanium as medical and dental implants. Yet, clinical and animal studies are limited in the field of implantology with such materials.

Availability of Total Knee Arthroplasty Implants for Metal Hypersensitivity Patients

Purpose

To provide information on the type of "hypersensitivity-friendly" components available for primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in the current market.

Materials and Methods

Implant manufactures were identified using the 2013 National Joint Registries of the United Kingdom and Sweden and contacted to obtain information about the products they offer for patients with metal hypersensitivity.

Results

Information on 23 TKA systems was provided by 13 implant manufacturers. Of these, 15 systems had options suitable for metal hypersensitivity patients. Two types of "hypersensitivity-friendly" components were identified: 10 implants were cobalt chrome prostheses with a "hypersensitivity-friendly" outer coating and 5 implants were made entirely from non-cobalt chrome alloys.

Conclusions

The results of this study suggest that several hypersensitivity TKA options exist, some of which provide the same designs and surgical techniques as the conventional implants. The information in this study can guide TKA surgeons in making informed choices about implants and identifying implants that could be examined in future controlled studies comparing outcomes between "hypersensitivity-friendly" and conventional implants.

Patch Testing for Metal Allergy With Manufacturer-Supplied Materials Before Nuss Bar Insertion

INTRODUCTION

The increasing use of metal implantable devices has raised awareness of nickel allergy. Preoperative patch testing for patients with pectus excavatum (PE) with a known metal allergy or history of atopy is an accepted practice before the Nuss procedure. The Nuss bar manufacturer offers a metal disc for preoperative testing for metal sensitivities. However, the efficacy of this disc is not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the sensitivity of the metal disc in detecting nickel allergy compared with that of standard patch testing.

METHODS

Two PE patients were referred for preoperative patch testing with the metal disc to screen for metal allergy before the Nuss procedure. Based on our initial findings, 7 patients without PE scheduled for patch testing for the evaluation of chronic dermatitis were additionally tested with the metal disc if they were found to have risk factors for nickel allergy. All patch testing was performed according to set standards.

CONCLUSIONS

The metal disc may not be adequately sensitive to determine nickel allergy before the Nuss procedure. Patch testing alone with standard formulations of nickel sulfate in petrolatum may be more sensitive in diagnosing nickel allergy.