Oral Cavity and Allergy: Meeting the Diagnostic and Therapeutic Challenge

Papakonstantinou, Eleni; Raap, Ulrike

doi:10.1007/s40496-016-0111-1

Cited by 1 publication

(2 citation statements)

References 79 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Symptoms related to nickel or titanium allergic sensitization in univariate analyses of present research are a weak sense of smell and/or taste, swellings of the tongue or face, and watery eyes. Previous data also suggest that gustatory impairment, sensory dysfunctions, swelling of the lip and face, and even tongue may be the symptoms of oral contact allergy [20][21][22][23]. The orofacial region has been associated with type I, III, and IV allergies.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…From a total of 250 subjects invited to participate, 22 (9%) dropped out because of the practicing of water sports or uncomplete questionnaires on symptoms potentially linked to titanium and nickel allergies. Therefore, 228 participants were included in the study in the age of 11 to 45 years (median 18, interquartile range [16][17][18][19][20][21][22]; 68% of them were females, and 52% were adolescents. None of the subjects with incomplete questionnaire on oral changes and symptoms potentially linked to titanium and nickel allergies were allergic to titanium nor to nickel.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Symptoms of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in orthodontic treatment

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: The study aimed to evaluate to which extent self-reported symptomatology, age, and sex are predictors of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in patients in treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances. Methods: The study analyzed 228 subjects aged 11-45 years (median 18, interquartile range 16-22); 68% of them were females, and 52% were adolescents. The allergic sensitization testing included epicutaneous patch test to titanium, titanium dioxide, titanium oxalate, titanium nitride, and nickel sulfate. The questionnaire on symptoms potentially linked to titanium and nickel sensitization was used. Results: Prevalence of the allergic sensitization to titanium in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment was 4% (2% only to titanium without nickel) while to nickel 14% (12% nickel without titanium). Hypersensitivity to both metals at the same time was present in 2% of subjects. Sensitization to nickel was more common in females than in males (17 vs. 8%) and much more common in adults than in adolescents with small effect size (20 vs. 8%; p = 0.013). Sensitization to titanium was more common in females than in males (6 vs. 1%) with no difference in age. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that adult age increases the odds for being sensitized to nickel for 2.4 × (95% CI 1.1-5.6; p = 0.044) while watery eyes for 3.7 × (95% CI 1.2-11.1; p = 0.022). None of the symptoms were significant predictors of titanium sensitization. Conclusion: Allergic sensitization to titanium and nickel are not very frequent in orthodontic patients, and selfreported symptomatology is a weak predictor of those sensitizations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%