A multicenter study of patch test reactions with dental screening series

Kanerva, Lasse; Rantanen, Tapio; Aalto‐Korte, Kristiina; Estlander, Tuula; Hannuksela, Matti; Harvima, Rauno J.; Hasan, Taina; Horsmanheimo, Maija; Jolanki, R; Kalimo, Kirsti; Lahti, Arto; Lammintausta, Kaija; Lauerma, Antti; Niinimäki, Aila; Turjanmaa, Kristiina; Vuorela, Anna-Maija

doi:10.1053/ajcd.2001.20913

Cited by 62 publications

(28 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Other studies showed eugenol-induced positive reactions in 0%, 0.6%, and 2% of patients. 12,13,15 Cinnamic aldehyde was rarely tested, and no positive reactions were identified. 15 Balsam of Peru, found in dentifrice, mouthwash, lipstick, and food, 22 was the second most reactive flavoring (positive reactions, 7.2%).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Contact allergy in oral disease

Torgerson¹,

Davis²,

Bruce³

et al. 2007

Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

119

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…[1][2][3][4][5][6][7][8][9][10][11] However, few studies have used larger oral allergen screening series that, in addition to metals, included flavorings, preservatives, and dental acrylates. [12][13][14][15][16] We report the results of patch tests to the 85 allergens in our oral screening series.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Contact allergy in oral disease

Torgerson¹,

Davis²,

Bruce³

et al. 2007

Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology

119

107

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…A first reading was made at 48 hours and a second at 72 hours after applying the patch. The following was considered evidence of sensitization: erythema, infiltration (papular reaction), edema and/or vesicles (16). …”

Section: Patient and Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of susceptibility to sensitization to dental materials in atopic and non-atopic patients

Alcayaga¹,

Carrasco-Labra²,

Danús³

et al. 2012

Med Oral

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction: Some studies report that atopic patients have a greater frequency of delayed-type sensitization than non-atopic patients. Objective: To determine the influence of the atopic condition on delayed sensitization to dental materials. Design: cross-sectional study. Methods: Forty (40) atopic subjects and forty (40) non-atopic subjects, of both sexes, between 20 and 65 years of age were included. The determination of delayed sensitization to dental materials was performed using patch test. An oral exam was also carried out to check for lesions of the oral mucosa. Results: 61.25% of the patients were positive for delayed-type sensitization to one or more allergens, being palladium chloride (21.25%), ammoniated mercury (20%), benzoyl peroxide (12.5%) and amalgam (10%) the most frequent. The frequency of sensitization was 67.5% in the group of atopic patients, compared to 55% in the non atopic group (p>0.05). The materials with the greatest difference of sensitization in atopic compared to non-atopic patients were ammoniated mercury, benzoyl peroxide, amalgam and Bisphenol A Dimethacrylate (BIS-GMA). Conclusion: The atopic condition is not related to a higher frequency of delayed sensitization to a battery of dental materials. Key words: Patch test, delayed-type sensitization, allergy contact, atopia, dental materials.

show abstract

“…Another preservative responsible of oral OCA is benzoic acid, with a rate of positive reactions reported between 3 and 11 % [4, 38, 41, 56]. …”

Section: Dental Materialsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Unmet diagnostic needs in contact oral mucosal allergies

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The oral mucosa including the lips is constantly exposed to several noxious stimuli, irritants and allergens. However, oral contact pathologies are not frequently seen because of the relative resistance of the oral mucosa to irritant agents and allergens due to anatomical and physiological factors. The spectrum of signs and symptoms of oral contact allergies (OCA) is broad and a large number of condition can be the clinical expression of OCA such as allergic contact stomatitis, allergic contact cheilitis, geographic tongue, oral lichenoid reactions, burning mouth syndrome. The main etiological factors causing OCA are dental materials, food and oral hygiene products, as they contain flavouring agents and preservatives. The personal medical history of the patient is helpful to perform a diagnosis, as a positive history for recent dental procedures. Sometimes histology is mandatory. When it cannot identify a direct cause of a substance, in both acute and chronic OCA, patch tests can play a pivotal role in the diagnosis. However, patch tests might have several pitfalls. Indeed, the presence of metal ions as haptens and specifically the differences in their concentrations in oral mucosa and in standard preparation for patch testing and in the differences in pH of the medium might result in either false positive/negative reactions or non-specific irritative reactions. Another limitation of patch test results is the difficulty to assess the clinical relevance of haptens contained in dental materials and only the removal of dental materials or the avoidance of other contactant and consequent improvement of the disease may demonstrate the haptens’ responsibility. In conclusion, the wide spectrum of clinical presentations, the broad range of materials and allergens which can cause it, the difficult interpretation of patch-test results, the clinical relevance assessment of haptens found positive at patch test are the main factors that make sometimes difficult the diagnosis and the management of OCA that requires an interdisciplinary approach to the patient.

show abstract

A multicenter study of patch test reactions with dental screening series

Abstract: Patch testing with allergens in the dental screening series, including (meth)acrylates and mercury, needs to be performed to detect contact allergy to dental products.

Cited by 62 publications

References 0 publications

Contact allergy in oral disease

Contact allergy in oral disease

Determination of susceptibility to sensitization to dental materials in atopic and non-atopic patients

Unmet diagnostic needs in contact oral mucosal allergies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About