Metal Hypersensitivity in Patients with Conventional Orthopaedic Implants

Nickel allergy does not correlate with function after total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a relationship between clinical outcomes and nickel allergy by evaluating asymptomatic total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients with well-functioning implants through quantitative metal allergy (MA) testing.

METHODS

A prospective case series was performed on 50 patients with well-functioning TKA of various implant types. Inclusion criteria included primary TKA with a minimum 12-month follow-up and Oxford knee score (OKS) ≥ 40. A commercially available Lymphocyte Transformation Test measured the amount of a hypersensitivity lymphocyte immune response after exposure to a particular antigen. MA results were stratified based on the stimulation index (SI). The Cochran-Mantel-Haenzel test was used to test the homogeneity of metal reactivities. The Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test was used to compare individual metal SI by gender and the association of OKS and metal SI was ascertained with the Spearman correlation.

RESULTS

Nickel, cobalt, and chromium do not have the same reactivity scores (p < 0.001), and only nickel showed reactive/highly reactive scores. Females were found to have 3.41 times the odds of males for higher Ni reactivity (p = 0.0295, odds ratio [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.41 [1.13-10.3]) only. Clinically, there was no correlation between metal SI and OKS score by metal (Ni rho = -0.1779; Co rho = -0.0036; Cr rho = -0.1748).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study looking at MA in well-functioning TKA. There is no correlation between clinical results and nickel reactivity. Surgeons should exercise caution when revising a painful or poorly functioning TKA based solely on a 'positive' Nickel Allergy test and look for other possible reasons for failure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Hypersensitivity to metals in metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty: a prospective study of one hundred and thirty five lymphocyte transformation tests

BACKGROUND

Metal allergy remains a controversial topic in the orthopaedic community. It is not known if or to what degree metal sensitivity contributes to inflammatory soft tissue failures, unexplained residual pain, or clinical complications after total joint replacement with metal prostheses.

METHODS

We investigated the efficacy of the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) in predicting adverse outcomes in patients after receiving a metal joint replacement. Our study cohort consists of 135 metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty cases performed between 2013 and 2015. All study patients had an LTT preoperatively. We retrospectively analyzed clinical outcomes and failures for our cohort.

RESULTS

There was no difference in LTT reactivity between men and women. Of the 135 patients tested, 46 (34.1% of cohort) tested positive to at least one of the materials comprising their implant, and 78 patients (57.8%) had at least one reactive score to any component of the LTT. After a minimum follow-up of two years, we did not observe an allergic response to the implant in any patients. There were no failures requiring revision. We observed a 2.2% rate of moderate residual pain; no patients with residual pain tested positive for metal sensitivity. When patients with moderate-high LTT reactivity (30.4% of cohort) were compared to the remainder of the study group, there was no difference in HHS or UCLA activity score. There was no correlation between blood metal ion levels and LTT reactivity.

CONCLUSION

We were unable to prove any predictive value of the LTT. We failed to identify hypersensitivity to metals in patients with metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty.

Bone and Soft Tissue Reaction to Co(II)/Cr(III) Ions Stimulation in a Murine Calvaria Model: A Pioneering in vivo Study

Metal ions released during wear and corrosion of the artificial knee/hip joints are considered to contribute to aseptic implant failure. However, there are few convincing in vivo studies that demonstrate the effects of metal ions on bone and soft tissue. This study examined the in vivo effects of Co(II)/Cr(III) ions on mouse calvaria and the supra-calvaria soft tissue in an original mouse model. With the implantation of a helmet-like structure, we set up a subcutaneous cavity on the calvaria in which Co(II) Chloride or Cr(III) Chloride solutions were administered respectively. A layer of interface membrane formed on the calvaria along with the implantation of the helmet. The administered Cr(III) ions accumulated in the interface membranes while Co(II) disseminated into the circulation. Accumulated Cr(III) and related products induced local massive macrophage infiltration and skewed the bone metabolic balance. At last, we revealed that lymphocyte aggregates, which are the pathologic hallmark of human periprosthetic tissue, could be caused by either Co(II) or Cr(III) stimulation. These in vivo results may shed light on the effects and pathogenic mechanism of the Co(II)/Cr(III) ions released from the joint prosthesis. STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE: Macrophage infiltration and lymphocyte aggregates are hallmarks of human joint periprosthetic tissue. We chronically administered Co(II)/Cr(III) ions on mouse calvaria and reproduced these two histopathologic hallmarks on mouse tissue based on an implanted helmet-like structure. Our results reveal that Cr(III) ions are locally accumulated and are effective in inducing macrophage infiltration and they can be phagocytosed and stored. However, the lymphocytes aggregates could be induced by both Co(II), Cr(III) and other unspecific inflammatory stimuli.

Incidence of Metal Hypersensitivity in Orthopedic Surgical Patients Who Self-Report Hypersensitivity History

INTRODUCTION

Metallic implants are integral to the practice of orthopedic surgery. Delayed-onset T-cell-mediated metal hypersensitivity (diagnosed by patch testing) is reported in 10% to 17% of the general population. Inconclusive evidence exists about the role of metal hypersensitivity in persistently painful or aseptic loosening of arthroplasties. Literature suggests that preoperative patch testing may influence surgical practice.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence of metal hypersensitivity in orthopedic surgical patients who self-report hypersensitivity and to characterize which metals are most commonly implicated.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review of patients from a single surgeon's practice was conducted during a 1-year period. All patients were questioned about metal hypersensitivity history; all patients who responded affirmatively were sent for patch testing for specific metals.

RESULTS

Only 41 (4.9%) of 840 patients self-reported any metal hypersensitivity. Of these, 34 (83%) were patch-test positive to 1 or more metals. There were 27 whose test results were positive for nickel, 4 each to cobalt or gold thiosulfate, and 1 each to tin or titanium. Seven patients had positive results to multiple metals, all of whom were also nickel hypersensitive. Six patients had metal orthopedic implants before patch testing, and 4 (67%) tested positively to a metal in their implant.

CONCLUSION

Metal hypersensitivity can be concerning for treating surgeons and patients. Greater awareness of a history to hypersensitivity may prevent patient exposure to implants containing metals that may cause hypersensitivity. Non-metal-containing or nonreactive metal implants are an option for patients in whom metal hypersensitivity is suspected or confirmed.

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.

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.