Patent Foramen Ovale Closure in Patients With and Without Nickel Hypersensitivity: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Nickel-containing devices, such as the Amplatzer PFO Occluder and Gore Cardioform Septal Occluder, are used for transcatheter patent foramen ovale closure. However, the impact of nickel hypersensitivity on postprocedural outcomes remains poorly understood. This study aimed to evaluate the risk of adverse events in patients with nickel hypersensitivity undergoing patent foramen ovale closure.

METHODS

This was a prospective, double-blinded, randomized study enrolling patients with cryptogenic stroke and patent foramen ovale-related ischemic stroke to receive either the Amplatzer or Gore Cardioform Septal Occluder device. Nickel hypersensitivity was assessed using skin patch testing. The primary end point was the incidence of device syndrome, a composite of patient-reported symptoms (chest pain, palpitations, migraines, dyspnea, and rash).

RESULTS

Of the 96 patients, 28 (29.2%) had nickel hypersensitivity. The incidence of device syndrome was significantly higher in patients with nickel hypersensitivity compared with those without (71.4% versus 20.6%, P<0.001). Specifically, new-onset or worsening migraines and palpitations were more frequent in nickel-hypersensitive patients. No significant differences were observed in documented arrhythmias, bleeding, or stroke. Multivariable analysis showed that nickel hypersensitivity was associated with a 10.5-fold increase in the odds of device syndrome (adjusted odds ratio, 10.53 [95% CI, 3.17-35.00]; P<0.001). The incidence of device syndrome was similar for both devices.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with nickel hypersensitivity are at significantly higher risk of developing device syndrome after patent foramen ovale closure. Both the Amplatzer and Gore Cardioform Septal Occluder devices demonstrated comparable safety and efficacy in this population. These findings highlight the need for further research to optimize device selection and improve outcomes in nickel-hypersensitive patients.

REGISTRATION

URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT04713683.

Nickel-related hypersensitivity reactions following endovascular interventions: A review of current evidence

INTRODUCTION

Nickel is a principal alloying agent in the production of vascular endoprostheses, despite persisting as the most habitually identified allergen. Variable nickel-related hypersensitivity manifestations following endovascular intervention were reported, challenging established paradigms in treatment and accuracy of prognostic assessments. The objective of this review is to critically evaluate current metrics to maximise patient-related outcomes.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted in compliance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2009 statement. Patients indicative of nickel hypersensitivity reaction following endovascular intervention were discerned. A positive reaction was defined by patch testing, histological analysis, or anamnesis indicative of nickel hypersensitivity. Morphology of implicating prostheses, adverse events and postoperative complications, clinical course, diagnostic and therapeutic strategies alongside patient prognosis were recorded.

RESULTS

Nickel-related hypersensitivity reactions following endovascular repair were identified in 36 patients with a median age of 44.5 years. 20 patients received nitinol-containing intervention. 28 (77.8%) patients are female. Multi-organ adverse reactions occurred in 21 (58.3%) patients with variable latency. 14 (38.9%) patients were presented with neurological adverse reactions manifesting mainly as unilateral hemiparesis. Dermatological reactions implicated 16 (44.4%) patients. Miscellaneous manifestations include suicidal ideation. 13 (36.1%) patients displayed previous metal intolerance and 32 (88.9%) patients had positive patch testing for nickel. Histological analysis of lesions and prostheses indicated lymphocytic infiltration. 5 (13.9%) patients experienced device-specific reactions as in-stent restenosis or auxiliary distal vessel stenosis. 11 (30.1%) patients received solely medical therapy and 5 (13.9%) patients received solely surgical therapy. 19 (52.7%) patients underwent both medical (oral corticosteroid) and surgical therapy (device retrieval). 26 (77.1%) patients achieved symptomatic cessation, 6 (16.7%) patients exhibited symptomatic persistence and 0 patients died.

CONCLUSION

Prophylactic pre-assessment for a history of metal allergy and consideration of prostheses alternatives is recommended to minimise reaction risk and severity. Despite nickel's predominant usage, information paucity urges additional studies to emphasise its implications and maximise patient outcomes.

Nickel Hypersensitivity to Atrial Septal Occluders: Smoke Without Fire?

Nickel is one of the most common contact allergens worldwide; it is used as the main component of the devices used for atrial septal defects (ASDs) and patent foramen ovale (PFO) closure. Developing nickel hypersensitivity after PFO/ASD occlusion is significantly rarer described in medical literature than typical nickel contact sensitization. The exact pathophysiological mechanism of this "device syndrome" remains unknown, and many question the real incidence or even the existence of this clinical entity. Nevertheless, it has been associated with a wide spectrum of symptoms, including chest pain, migraines, palpitation, and dyspnea. Skin patch tests are the first-line approach to diagnose nickel hypersensitivity. However, diagnostic criteria for the device syndrome have not been developed, and diagnosis in reported cases is established by a process of elimination. Management-drug therapy (corticosteroids, clopidogrel, etc.) or even surgical explantation in severe cases-of patients developing such clinical manifestations after percutaneous PFO/ASD occlusion is empirical. Undoubtedly, endocardiac device-related nickel hypersensitivity requires more focused research to discover the underlying mechanism as well as to develop reliable prognostic tests for detecting high-risk patients and preventing severe nickel hypersensitivity reactions.

Systemic Allergic Contact Dermatitis Due to a GORE CARDIOFORM Septal Occluder Device: A Case Report and Literature Review

Nickel hypersensitivity is a rarely reported complication of percutaneous patent foramen ovale/atrial septal defect closure. Herein, we report a case of systemic allergic contact dermatitis to nickel present in a GORE CARDIOFORM (W.L. Gore, Flagstaff, Arizona) septal occluder that resolved following explanation. To our knowledge this is the first published case of nickel hypersensitivity associated with this device. (Level of Difficulty: Beginner.)

Corrosion resistance of a Nitinol ocular microstent: Implications on biocompatibility

Nitinol is commonly used in medical implants due to its unique thermomechanical properties of shape memory and superelasticity. Free nickel has the potential to induce biological responses that may be a concern for permanent implants manufactured from nickel-containing alloys. Although there are extensive reports on the effects of surface treatments on corrosion behavior in cardiovascular Nitinol implants, there is a lack of data on corrosion resistance and impact on biocompatibility for ocular implants. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine localized corrosion and nickel elution resistance of an electropolished Nitinol-based ocular device (Hydrus Microstent, Ivantis, Inc.) intended for patients with primary open angle glaucoma. Pitting corrosion susceptibility was characterized by potentiodynamic polarization testing per ASTM F2129. In addition, nickel ion release was quantified with immersion testing to 63 days. The results indicated high localized corrosion resistance as all samples reached polarization potentials of 800 mV without pitting initiation. Maximum nickel elution rates per device were less than approximately 1.1 ng/device/day after the first day of immersion and reduced to less than 0.1 ng/device/day after 7 days. For a patient with bilateral microstents, these nickel concentrations are ×10,000 lower than previously published tolerable intake levels for systemic toxicity. Overall, these corrosion results are in good agreement with literature values of well processed and biocompatible Nitinol devices indicating adverse systemic biological responses are not expected in vivo.

Surgical explantation of atrial septal closure devices for refractory nickel allergy symptoms

OBJECTIVES

Systemic allergic reactions to nickel alloys in percutaneous atrial septal defect occlusion devices have a poorly defined natural history. We describe our experience of surgical removal of the offending device in a series of patients with nickel allergy and refractory symptoms.

METHODS

Patients with atrial septal defect device explants for nickel allergy were reviewed. Administered questionnaires focused on symptoms, quality of life, and satisfaction along with the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey to measure physical and mental health postsurgery.

RESULTS

Atrial septal defect devices were removed for nickel allergy in 58 patients during the past 10 years. The median age was 42 years (range, 24-71 years) and 95% were women. Explantation occurred at a median of 8 years (range, 6 months-18 years) after insertion. Symptoms included fatigue (82%), chest pain (78%), headache (73%), and palpitation (58%). Surveys were available for 45 patients: 58% rated their quality of life as poor and 69% were not at all satisfied with their device. Postexplant, all patients reported improvement in their symptoms, with 18 patients (42%) noting complete resolution. In 12 patients prospectively studied, the preoperative scores in physical and mental health domains were lower than the validation group, indicating significant disability. Similarly, there was marked improvement in each domain postremoval.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with nickel allergy and severe refractory symptoms after atrial septal defect device implantation experience profound resolution of symptoms and improved quality of life after removal. Nickel allergy should be considered before device insertion, and a low threshold should exist for surgical removal for refractory symptoms.

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.