ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS TO ARTHROPLASTIES - A RARITY OR A SUBDIAGNOSED ENTITY?
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2015 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
Texto Completo: | https://doi.org/10.29021/spdv.73.1.353 |
Resumo: | Introduction: Allergic contact dermatitis to the constituents of the prosthesis occurs in 5% of patients and may be the etiology of the failure of arthroplasty. The most common sensitizer’s metals are nickel, cobalt and chromium. The components of the cement have also been implicated as allergens.Methods: A retrospective study of patients with arthroplasties, who performed patch tests, after suspicion of allergic contact dermatitis in the last 2 years was done. We carried out tests with the standard battery of the Portuguese Group for the Study of Contact dermatitis and supplemental batteries, including metals, acrylates/methacrylates and topical antibiotics.Results: Fourteen patients were included: 10 underwent knee arthroplasty, 3 hip arthroplasty and 1 ankle arthroplasty. Patients had limited function of joints. The mean age of patients observed was 61.6 years and 12 patients were females and 2 males. The symptoms appeared on average 14.4 months after surgery. Nine patients had positive reactions to nickel, 5 to cobalt, 1 to chromium, 1 to gentamicin and neomycin. In these cases we opted for placing the prosthesis revision with oxinium and/or titanium, with improvement of symptomatology.Discussion and conclusions: This review showed the importance of performing patch tests in patients with clinical signs of failure of arthroplasty, since patients with sensitization to its constituent improved with the replacement of prosthesis. |
id |
RCAP_372e26945b5a14f5769fec873c69cbe1 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.revista.spdv.com.pt:article/353 |
network_acronym_str |
RCAP |
network_name_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository_id_str |
7160 |
spelling |
ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS TO ARTHROPLASTIES - A RARITY OR A SUBDIAGNOSED ENTITY?ECZEMA DE CONTACTO ALÉRGICO A ARTROPLASTIAS – UMA RARIDADE OU UMA ENTIDADE SUBDIAGOSTICADA?ArthroplastyreplacementDermatitisallergic contactPatch testsArtroplastia de substituiçãoDermatite alérgica de contactoTestes epicutâneosIntroduction: Allergic contact dermatitis to the constituents of the prosthesis occurs in 5% of patients and may be the etiology of the failure of arthroplasty. The most common sensitizer’s metals are nickel, cobalt and chromium. The components of the cement have also been implicated as allergens.Methods: A retrospective study of patients with arthroplasties, who performed patch tests, after suspicion of allergic contact dermatitis in the last 2 years was done. We carried out tests with the standard battery of the Portuguese Group for the Study of Contact dermatitis and supplemental batteries, including metals, acrylates/methacrylates and topical antibiotics.Results: Fourteen patients were included: 10 underwent knee arthroplasty, 3 hip arthroplasty and 1 ankle arthroplasty. Patients had limited function of joints. The mean age of patients observed was 61.6 years and 12 patients were females and 2 males. The symptoms appeared on average 14.4 months after surgery. Nine patients had positive reactions to nickel, 5 to cobalt, 1 to chromium, 1 to gentamicin and neomycin. In these cases we opted for placing the prosthesis revision with oxinium and/or titanium, with improvement of symptomatology.Discussion and conclusions: This review showed the importance of performing patch tests in patients with clinical signs of failure of arthroplasty, since patients with sensitization to its constituent improved with the replacement of prosthesis.Introdução: O eczema de contacto alérgico aos constituintes das próteses ocorre em 1-5% dos doentes e pode ser a causa de falência das artroplastias. Os metais sensibilizantes mais comuns são o níquel, o cobalto e o crómio.Métodos: Estudo retrospectivo dos doentes com artroplastias, submetidos a testes epicutâneos nos últimos 2 anos, com suspeita clinica de eczema de contacto alérgico. Efectuaram-se testes com a bateria padrão do Grupo Português de Estudo das Dermites de Contacto e as baterias complementares de metais, acrilatos/metacrilatos e antibióticos tópicos.Resultados: Foram testados 14 doentes: 10 submetidos a artroplastias do joelho, 3 da anca e 1 do tornozelo. A média de idades foi de 61,6 anos, sendo que 12 eram do sexo feminino. Todos os doentes apresentavam limitação funcional das articulações. A sintomatologia apareceu em média 14,4 meses após a cirurgia. Nove doentes obtiveram positividade ao níquel, 5 ao cobalto, 1 ao crómio, 1 à gentamicina e neomicina. Nesses casos, optou-se pela cirurgia de revisão com substituição por componentes em oxinium e/ou titânio, com melhoria dos sinais inflamatórios.Discussão: Esta revisão mostrou a importância da realização de testes epicutâneos nos doentes com sinais clínicos de falência das artroplastias. Observou-se melhoria das queixas e dos sinais inflamatórios em todos os doentes com sensibilização aos constituintes das artroplastias após a sua substituição. Permanece controverso se os doentes com suspeita de eczema de contacto alérgico a artroplastias deverão ser testados apenas com os seus constituintes ou com uma bateria alargada de alergénios.Sociedade Portuguesa de Dermatologia e Venereologia2015-06-06T00:00:00Zjournal articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://doi.org/10.29021/spdv.73.1.353oai:ojs.revista.spdv.com.pt:article/353Journal of the Portuguese Society of Dermatology and Venereology; Vol 73 No 1 (2015): Janeiro - Março; 123-126Revista da Sociedade Portuguesa de Dermatologia e Venereologia; v. 73 n. 1 (2015): Janeiro - Março; 123-1262182-24092182-2395reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos)instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãoinstacron:RCAAPporhttps://revista.spdv.com.pt/index.php/spdv/article/view/353https://doi.org/10.29021/spdv.73.1.353https://revista.spdv.com.pt/index.php/spdv/article/view/353/322Resende, CristinaSantos, R.Pereira, T.Araújo, C.Tavares, N.Brito, C.info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-10-06T12:34:52Zoai:ojs.revista.spdv.com.pt:article/353Portal AgregadorONGhttps://www.rcaap.pt/oai/openaireopendoar:71602024-03-19T16:10:51.857031Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informaçãofalse |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS TO ARTHROPLASTIES - A RARITY OR A SUBDIAGNOSED ENTITY? ECZEMA DE CONTACTO ALÉRGICO A ARTROPLASTIAS – UMA RARIDADE OU UMA ENTIDADE SUBDIAGOSTICADA? |
title |
ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS TO ARTHROPLASTIES - A RARITY OR A SUBDIAGNOSED ENTITY? |
spellingShingle |
ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS TO ARTHROPLASTIES - A RARITY OR A SUBDIAGNOSED ENTITY? Resende, Cristina Arthroplasty replacement Dermatitis allergic contact Patch tests Artroplastia de substituição Dermatite alérgica de contacto Testes epicutâneos |
title_short |
ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS TO ARTHROPLASTIES - A RARITY OR A SUBDIAGNOSED ENTITY? |
title_full |
ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS TO ARTHROPLASTIES - A RARITY OR A SUBDIAGNOSED ENTITY? |
title_fullStr |
ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS TO ARTHROPLASTIES - A RARITY OR A SUBDIAGNOSED ENTITY? |
title_full_unstemmed |
ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS TO ARTHROPLASTIES - A RARITY OR A SUBDIAGNOSED ENTITY? |
title_sort |
ALLERGIC CONTACT DERMATITIS TO ARTHROPLASTIES - A RARITY OR A SUBDIAGNOSED ENTITY? |
author |
Resende, Cristina |
author_facet |
Resende, Cristina Santos, R. Pereira, T. Araújo, C. Tavares, N. Brito, C. |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Santos, R. Pereira, T. Araújo, C. Tavares, N. Brito, C. |
author2_role |
author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Resende, Cristina Santos, R. Pereira, T. Araújo, C. Tavares, N. Brito, C. |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Arthroplasty replacement Dermatitis allergic contact Patch tests Artroplastia de substituição Dermatite alérgica de contacto Testes epicutâneos |
topic |
Arthroplasty replacement Dermatitis allergic contact Patch tests Artroplastia de substituição Dermatite alérgica de contacto Testes epicutâneos |
description |
Introduction: Allergic contact dermatitis to the constituents of the prosthesis occurs in 5% of patients and may be the etiology of the failure of arthroplasty. The most common sensitizer’s metals are nickel, cobalt and chromium. The components of the cement have also been implicated as allergens.Methods: A retrospective study of patients with arthroplasties, who performed patch tests, after suspicion of allergic contact dermatitis in the last 2 years was done. We carried out tests with the standard battery of the Portuguese Group for the Study of Contact dermatitis and supplemental batteries, including metals, acrylates/methacrylates and topical antibiotics.Results: Fourteen patients were included: 10 underwent knee arthroplasty, 3 hip arthroplasty and 1 ankle arthroplasty. Patients had limited function of joints. The mean age of patients observed was 61.6 years and 12 patients were females and 2 males. The symptoms appeared on average 14.4 months after surgery. Nine patients had positive reactions to nickel, 5 to cobalt, 1 to chromium, 1 to gentamicin and neomycin. In these cases we opted for placing the prosthesis revision with oxinium and/or titanium, with improvement of symptomatology.Discussion and conclusions: This review showed the importance of performing patch tests in patients with clinical signs of failure of arthroplasty, since patients with sensitization to its constituent improved with the replacement of prosthesis. |
publishDate |
2015 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2015-06-06T00:00:00Z |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
journal article info:eu-repo/semantics/article |
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://doi.org/10.29021/spdv.73.1.353 oai:ojs.revista.spdv.com.pt:article/353 |
url |
https://doi.org/10.29021/spdv.73.1.353 |
identifier_str_mv |
oai:ojs.revista.spdv.com.pt:article/353 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://revista.spdv.com.pt/index.php/spdv/article/view/353 https://doi.org/10.29021/spdv.73.1.353 https://revista.spdv.com.pt/index.php/spdv/article/view/353/322 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Portuguesa de Dermatologia e Venereologia |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Sociedade Portuguesa de Dermatologia e Venereologia |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Journal of the Portuguese Society of Dermatology and Venereology; Vol 73 No 1 (2015): Janeiro - Março; 123-126 Revista da Sociedade Portuguesa de Dermatologia e Venereologia; v. 73 n. 1 (2015): Janeiro - Março; 123-126 2182-2409 2182-2395 reponame:Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) instname:Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação instacron:RCAAP |
instname_str |
Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
instacron_str |
RCAAP |
institution |
RCAAP |
reponame_str |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
collection |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Científico de Acesso Aberto de Portugal (Repositórios Cientìficos) - Agência para a Sociedade do Conhecimento (UMIC) - FCT - Sociedade da Informação |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
|
_version_ |
1799130565034639360 |