Allergic contact dermatitis to gold

Elgart, M. L.

doi:10.1001/archderm.103.6.649

Cited by 20 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Some of the reports refer to facial or generalized symptoms related to dental metallic restorations (Fernstrom, Frykholm & Huldt, 1962;Bredlinger & Tarsitano, 1970;Elgart & Higdon, 1971;Fregert, Kollander & Poulsen, 1979;Ketel & Neibber, 1981;Nakayama, 1982;Hubler & Hubler, 1983;Yontchev, Meding & Hedegard, 1986). Several such patients have been referred to the Nagasaki University Hospital of Dentistry for examination in recent years.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The prevalence of sensitivity to constituents of dental alloys

Namikoshi

Yoshimatsu

Suga

et al. 1990

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Ninety-five participants were epicutaneous patch tested in order to determine the prevalence of sensitivity to components of dental alloys. Seventeen individuals (17.9%) developed allergic reactions, which were caused by mercury (10.5%), copper (2.1%), nickel, cobalt, tin, gold and zinc (1.1%). Eight of 17 allergic responders had a history of dermatitis from metal contact. The results show that there is a need for careful immunological considerations during the selection of suitable alloys, particularly in the case of patients with lesions suspected of being caused by dental alloys.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The prevalence of sensitivity to constituents of dental alloys

Namikoshi

Yoshimatsu

Suga

et al. 1990

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…When patch tests are followed over an extended period of time, late-appearing reactions and longlasting reactions are considered to indicate allergic reactions. Positive patch test reactions to gold appear late and they are extremely long-lasting (1,14,18,23,(37)(38)(39).…”

Section: Establishment Of Contact Allergymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Allergic contact dermatitis and stomatitis from gold have occasionally been reported (12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21). The allergy has been demonstrated by patch testing with various gold salts (12)(13)(14)(15)(16)(17)(18)(19)(20)(21) and even with the metal itself (12).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Gold – a controversial sensitizer

Bruze

Andersen

1999

Contact Dermatitis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Until recently, gold allergy was considered to be extremely rare. Gold has been used and worshipped for thousands of years without any obvious complaints of skin problems, either in those participating in mining and other ways of prospecting, or in those wearing jewellery. When studies on contact allergy to gold sodium thiosulfate were published at the beginning of the 1990s, the allergic nature of the reported positive patch test reactions to gold was questioned. The major argument for such questioning was the lack of demonstrable clinical relevance in most positive reactors. A major reason for the questioning may have been confusion in differentiating between contact allergy and allergic contact dermatitis. To arrive at a diagnosis of allergic contact dermatitis, 3 steps have, in principle, to be fulfilled: (i) establishment of contact allergy; (ii) demonstration of present exposure; (iii) assessment of clinical relevance, i.e., causing or aggravating a contact dermatitis. In this paper, these steps are discussed with regard to gold. With our present knowledge of contact allergy -allergic contact dermatitis, we do not recommend including gold sodium thiosulfate in the standard series. It should be applied for scientific purposes and when allergic contact dermatitis from gold is suspected.

show abstract

“…Mucosal reactions to gold in bridges, crowns and dentures have been reported, with clinical appearances ranging from erythema to ulceration (Schopf, Wex & Schulz, 1970;Elgart & Higdon, 1971;Young, 1974;Klaschka, 1975;Fregert, Kollander & Poulsen, 1979;Wiesenfeld et al, 1984). The accompanying histological changes consisted of a non-specific chronic inflammatory infiltrate characteristically seen with a type IV hypersensitivity response, which involved the epithelium (Wiesenfeld et al., 1984).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mucosal reactions to amalgam restorations

Jameson

Kardos

Kirk

et al. 1990

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Amalgam restorations have been implicated both in contact sensitivity reactions and in lichenoid reactions. This appears to be related principally to the mercury content, although other metals cannot be discounted. The cases of two patients are reported who showed features of lichenoid reactions of the oral mucosa, in addition to features of a contact hypersensitivity to mercury. The mucosal lesions resolved following replacement of the amalgams with non-metallic restorations. Consideration is given to the selection of materials and procedures currently available for treatment of these patients. This paper supports the view that sensitivity to heavy metals must be considered as a possible cause of erythematous and lichenoid reactions of the oral mucosa.

show abstract

Allergic contact dermatitis to gold

Cited by 20 publications

References 0 publications

The prevalence of sensitivity to constituents of dental alloys

The prevalence of sensitivity to constituents of dental alloys

Gold – a controversial sensitizer

Mucosal reactions to amalgam restorations

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About