An observational study to determine the sensitizing potential of orthopedic implants

Existing and Novel Assessment Methods for Metal Sensitivity in Elective Lower-Limb Arthroplasty-A Scoping Review

Background

Metal sensitivity is a possible cause for revision in elective lower-limb arthroplasty. This scoping review aims to identify and evaluate all existing and novel assessment methods for metal sensitivity in elective lower-limb arthroplasty.

Methods

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), Ovid Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (MEDLINE), PubMed, and Google Scholar databases were searched for studies published between January 1, 2000, and September 1, 2023. Studies evaluating one or more metal sensitivity assessment method preoperatively, perioperatively, or postoperatively were included. Studies were grouped based on the assessment methods reported and summarized based on the study design, outcome measure, results, and comments on the method's validity.

Results

A total of 1220 results were screened, with 39 results (15 retrospective cohort studies, 11 prospective cohort studies, 6 case reports, 5 randomized controlled trials, and 2 case control studies) included, identifying 12 assessment methods. The most used one was patch testing, featuring in 17 studies (43.6%). Lymphocyte transformation assay/testing featured in 12 studies (30.8%). Plasma/serum concentration of metal ions featured in 6 studies (15.4%). Patient history and serum cytokine testing featured in 7 (17.9%) and 4 (10.3%) studies each. Generalized serum inflammatory markers featured in 3 studies (7.7%). The remaining 6 methods each featured in one or 2 studies. Evidence of the reliability of most metrics was limited.

Conclusions

Several assessment methods were identified. However, evidence of any methods reliably predicting and diagnosing the occurrence of metal sensitivity was limited. There is a need for improved metrics of metal hypersensitivity.

Understanding immune-mediated cobalt/chromium allergy to orthopaedic implants: a meta-synthetic review

BACKGROUND

The frequency of primary joint replacement surgery continues to increase worldwide. While largely considered biologically inert entities, an increasing body of evidence continues to validate a not insignificant incidence of allergic reactions to such implants. Little previous work has explored genuinely immune-mediated reactivity in this context. In the absence of a contemporary published summary on the topic, this paper explored the current state of understanding of cobalt/chromium allergy and proposes a patient management algorithm whereby such immune reactions are clinically suggested.

METHODS

A structured, systematic literature review was performed by following PRISMA search principles to provide an updated review of this area.

RESULTS

Thirty-six topic-related articles were identified, the majority reflecting lower tiers of scientific evidence with a lack of homogeneous quantitative data to facilitate valid cohort comparisons. Largely, the available literature represented small case series' or expert opinions.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite increasing clinical awareness and acknowledgement of true allergy to joint replacement components, this review highlighted that the evidence base underpinning the diagnosis and management of such patients is limited. Both patient-reported metal allergy or skin patch testing are grossly unreliable methods and show almost no correlation with true immune reactivity. Recent studies suggested a potential role for patient-specific in vitro cellular activation testing and/or targeted genetic testing when cobalt/chromium allergy is clinically suspected. However, while likely representing the contemporary "best available" approaches both can be costly undertakings, are not yet universally available, and still require broader validation in non-research settings before wider uptake can be championed.

Metal Allergy: State-of-the-Art Mechanisms, Biomarkers, Hypersensitivity to Implants

Metal allergy is mainly an environmental disorder which can cause allergic contact dermatitis. Environmental metal exposures include jewelry, everyday metal items, mobile phones, leather, metal-rich food and implants, including stents or anchors. While consumer exposure is liable for the majority of metal hypersensitivity cases, the significance of occupational exposure to metals remains relevant. Although the most common metal allergens are nickel, chromium, and cobalt; however, lately, gold, palladium, titanium, and some others have also attracted attention. This review highlights advances in metal allergy mechanisms, biomarkers for potential patients' stratification as well as biological treatments. The most recent evidence of human exposure to metal for risk assessment is discussed, as well as the relationship between the occurrence of metal hypersensitivity and implanted devices, including non-characteristic symptoms. The latest data on the diagnosis of metal hypersensitivity are also reported.

The effect of Nickel hypersensitivity on the outcome of total knee arthroplasty and the value of skin patch testing: a systematic review

Background

To assess the Nickel sensitizing potential of total knee arthroplasty (TKA), explore the relationship between hypersensitivity and clinical outcomes, and evaluate the utility of skin patch testing pre- and/or postoperatively.

Materials and methods

A literature search was performed through EMBASE, Medline and PubMed databases. Articles were screened independently by two investigators. The level of evidence of studies was assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Criteria and the quality evaluated using the Methodological Index for Non-randomized Studies and Cochrane risk-of-bias tools.

Results

Twenty studies met the eligibility criteria, reporting on 1354 knee arthroplasties. Studies included patients undergoing primary or revision TKA, pre- and/or postoperatively, and used patch testing to identify Nickel hypersensitivity. Prevalence of Nickel hypersensitivity ranged from 0% to 87.5%. One study compared the prevalence of Nickel hypersensitivity in the same patient group before and after surgery and noted newly positive patch test reactions in three patients (4.2%). Three studies reported lower prevalence of Nickel hypersensitivity in postoperative patients compared to preoperative ones. Seven studies suggested that hypersensitivity might cause adverse clinical outcomes, but six did not support any relationship. Seven studies recommended preoperative patch testing in patients with history of metal allergy, and nine concluded that testing may be valuable postoperatively.

Conclusions

Patients undergoing TKA with no prior history of metal hypersensitivity do not seem to be at an increased risk of developing Nickel hypersensitivity, and there is conflicting evidence that patients with pre-existing hypersensitivity are more likely to experience adverse outcomes. Patch testing remains the most commonly used method for diagnosing hypersensitivity, and evidence suggests preoperative testing in patients with history of metal allergy to aid prosthesis selection, and postoperatively in patients with suspected hypersensitivity once common causes of implant failure have been excluded, since revision with hypoallergenic implants may alleviate symptoms.

Nickel hypersensitivity and skin patch testing in total hip replacement surgery: a systematic review

Approximately 60,000 cemented femoral stems are implanted in the UK each year with the majority being manufactured from stainless steel containing 10–15% nickel. Nickel hypersensitivity has been reported in up to 13% of the general population and there is a concern that nickel hypersensitivity might adversely affect the outcome of total hip replacement (THR). We reviewed the current literature on the potential link between nickel hypersensitivity and THR complications, and the usefulness of patch testing.

We conducted a literature search in PubMed, MEDLINE and EMBASE databases. The level of evidence and the quality of the selected studies were assessed using the Oxford Centre for Evidence-Based Medicine Criteria and the Methodological Index for Non-Randomised Studies tool, respectively.

Twenty-six studies met the inclusion criteria, reporting on 1852 patients who underwent primary or revision THR. All studies detailed skin patch testing and recorded prevalence of nickel hypersensitivity from 1.5% to 33.3%. Five studies reported a rise in Nickel hypersensitivity following THR, while four reported a decreased prevalence post-operatively. Eight studies concluded that metal hypersensitivity could have developed following THR, while seven studies did not support a link between metal hypersensitivity and THR complications. Four of the studies recommended routine patch testing pre-operatively, but three others concluded that routine patch testing was not indicated.

We have not identified a link between nickel hypersensitivity and THR complications, and the role of patch testing remains unclear. Further large-scale studies would be required to investigate this relationship and to clarify the role of patch testing in facilitating implant selection.

Cite this article: EFORT Open Rev 2021;6:825-838. DOI: 10.1302/2058-5241.6.210051