Skip to main content

Lund University Publications

LUND UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES

A literature review and expert consensus statement on diagnostics in suspected metal implant allergy

Thomas, P. LU ; Arenberger, P. ; Bader, R. ; Bircher, A. J. ; Bruze, M. LU ; de Graaf, N. ; Hartmann, D. ; Johansen, J. D. ; Jowitz-Heinke, A. and Krenn, V. , et al. (2024) In Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
Abstract

Background: Although rare, allergic reactions to metal implants represent a diagnostic challenge in view of missing guidelines. Objectives: To develop an European expert consensus on characteristics of metal allergy reactions and the utility of various diagnostic tools in suspected metal implant allergy. Methods: A nominal group technique (NGT) was applied to develop consensus statements. Initially an online literature database was created on a secure server to enable a comprehensive information. Twenty-three statements were formulated on potential aspects of metal implant allergy with a focus on diagnostics and grouped into five domains. For the consensus development, the panel of 12 experts initially did refine and reformulate those... (More)

Background: Although rare, allergic reactions to metal implants represent a diagnostic challenge in view of missing guidelines. Objectives: To develop an European expert consensus on characteristics of metal allergy reactions and the utility of various diagnostic tools in suspected metal implant allergy. Methods: A nominal group technique (NGT) was applied to develop consensus statements. Initially an online literature database was created on a secure server to enable a comprehensive information. Twenty-three statements were formulated on potential aspects of metal implant allergy with a focus on diagnostics and grouped into five domains. For the consensus development, the panel of 12 experts initially did refine and reformulate those statements that were ambiguous or had unclear wording. By face-to-face (9/12) or virtual participation (3/12), an anonymous online voting was performed. Results: Consensus (≥80% of agreement) was reached in 20/23 statements. The panel agreed that implant allergy despite being rare should be considered in case of persistent unexplained symptoms. It was, however, recommended to allow adequate time for resolution of symptoms associated with healing and integration of an implant. Obtaining questionnaire-aided standardized medical history and standardized scoring of patient outcomes was also considered an important step by all experts There was broad consensus regarding the utility/performance of patch testing with additional late reading. It was recognized that the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) has to many limitations to be generally recommended. Prior to orthopaedic implant, allergy screening of patients without a history of potential allergy to implant components was not recommended. Conclusions: Using an expert consensus process, statements concerning allergy diagnostics in suspected metal implant allergy were created. Areas of nonconsensus were identified, stressing uncertainty among the experts around topics such as preoperative testing in assumed allergy, histological correlate of periimplant allergy and in vitro testing, which underscores the need for further research.

(Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and , et al. (More)
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; and (Less)
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
epub
subject
in
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology
publisher
Elsevier
external identifiers
  • scopus:85190524463
  • pmid:38606660
ISSN
0926-9959
DOI
10.1111/jdv.20026
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
843c9163-b0b5-4e16-bed6-b996f2f30ff2
date added to LUP
2024-05-03 12:33:00
date last changed
2024-06-14 16:39:05
@article{843c9163-b0b5-4e16-bed6-b996f2f30ff2,
  abstract     = {{<p>Background: Although rare, allergic reactions to metal implants represent a diagnostic challenge in view of missing guidelines. Objectives: To develop an European expert consensus on characteristics of metal allergy reactions and the utility of various diagnostic tools in suspected metal implant allergy. Methods: A nominal group technique (NGT) was applied to develop consensus statements. Initially an online literature database was created on a secure server to enable a comprehensive information. Twenty-three statements were formulated on potential aspects of metal implant allergy with a focus on diagnostics and grouped into five domains. For the consensus development, the panel of 12 experts initially did refine and reformulate those statements that were ambiguous or had unclear wording. By face-to-face (9/12) or virtual participation (3/12), an anonymous online voting was performed. Results: Consensus (≥80% of agreement) was reached in 20/23 statements. The panel agreed that implant allergy despite being rare should be considered in case of persistent unexplained symptoms. It was, however, recommended to allow adequate time for resolution of symptoms associated with healing and integration of an implant. Obtaining questionnaire-aided standardized medical history and standardized scoring of patient outcomes was also considered an important step by all experts There was broad consensus regarding the utility/performance of patch testing with additional late reading. It was recognized that the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) has to many limitations to be generally recommended. Prior to orthopaedic implant, allergy screening of patients without a history of potential allergy to implant components was not recommended. Conclusions: Using an expert consensus process, statements concerning allergy diagnostics in suspected metal implant allergy were created. Areas of nonconsensus were identified, stressing uncertainty among the experts around topics such as preoperative testing in assumed allergy, histological correlate of periimplant allergy and in vitro testing, which underscores the need for further research.</p>}},
  author       = {{Thomas, P. and Arenberger, P. and Bader, R. and Bircher, A. J. and Bruze, M. and de Graaf, N. and Hartmann, D. and Johansen, J. D. and Jowitz-Heinke, A. and Krenn, V. and Kurek, M. and Odgaard, A. and Rustemeyer, T. and Summer, B. and Thyssen, J. P.}},
  issn         = {{0926-9959}},
  language     = {{eng}},
  publisher    = {{Elsevier}},
  series       = {{Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology}},
  title        = {{A literature review and expert consensus statement on diagnostics in suspected metal implant allergy}},
  url          = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdv.20026}},
  doi          = {{10.1111/jdv.20026}},
  year         = {{2024}},
}