Current Allergy and Asthma Reports

, Volume 13, Issue 5, pp 518–527 | Cite as

Systemic Contact Dermatitis and Allergy to Biomedical Devices

ALLERGIC SKIN DISEASES (L FONACIER, SECTION EDITOR)

Abstract

Systemic contact dermatitis (SCD) refers to a skin condition where an individual who is cutaneously sensitized to an allergen will subsequently react to that same allergen or a cross-reacting allergen via the systemic route. It occurs to allergens including metals, medications, and foods. There has been recent interest in metal allergy as it relates to the implantation of devices such as orthopedic, dental, cardiac, and gynecologic implants. This review will briefly address all causes of systemic contact dermatitis with a special and expanded focus on metal implant allergy. We present literature on SCD to various metal biomedical devices, patch testing for diagnosis of metal allergy pre and post implantation and treatment.

Keywords

Systemic contact dermatitis Allergic contact dermatitis Metal allergy Orthopedic implant Dental implant Dental amalgam Stent Pacemaker Intrauterine devices Biomedical devices 

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been hihglighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    • Winnicki M, Shear NH. A systematic approach to systemic contact dermatitis and symmetric drug-related intertriginous and flexural exanthema (SDRIFE): a closer look at these conditions and an approach to intertriginous eruptions. Am J Clin Dermatol. 2011;12(3):171–80. Evaluation of systemic contact dermatitis with special attention to symmetric drug-related intertriginous exanthema which is suggestive of medication-induced dermatitis in patients without previous history of cutaneous sensitization.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Veien NK. Systemic contact dermatitis. Int J Dermatol. 2011;50(12):1445–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Yoshihisa Y, Shimizu T. Metal allergy and systemic contact dermatitis: an overview. Dermatol Res Pract. 2012;2012:749561.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Andersen KE, Hjorth N, Menne T. The baboon syndrome: systemically-induced allergic contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1984;10(2):97–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Paulsen E. Contact sensitization from Compositae-containing herbal remedies and cosmetics. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;47(4):189–98.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Rycroft RJ. Recurrent facial dermatitis from chamomile tea. Contact Dermatitis. 2003;48(4):229.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rodriguez-Serna M, Sanchez-Motilla JM, Ramon R, Aliaga A. Allergic and systemic contact dermatitis from Matricaria chamomilla tea. Contact Dermatitis. 1998;39(4):192–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cusack C, Buckley C. Compositae dermatitis in a herbal medicine enthusiast. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;53(2):120–1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fonacier LS, Aquino MR, Mucci T. Current strategies in treating severe contact dermatitis in pediatric patients. Curr Allergy Asthma Rep. 2012;12(6):599–606.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Herro EM, Jacob SE. Systemic Contact Dermatitis - Kids and Ketchup. Pediatr Dermatol. May 2013;30(3):e32–3.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Salam TN, Fowler Jr JF. Balsam-related systemic contact dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2001;45(3):377–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lowther A, McCormick T, Nedorost S. Systemic contact dermatitis from propylene glycol. Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society, North American Contact Dermatitis Group. Mar-Apr 2008;19(2):105–108Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    • Scheman A, Cha C, Jacob SE, Nedorost S. Food avoidance diets for systemic, lip, and oral contact allergy: an american contact alternatives group article. Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society, North American Contact Dermatitis Group. Nov-Dec 2012;23(6):248–257. Food avoidance may be helpful in patients with systemic contact dermatitis, particularly if sensitized to propylene glycol, an emerging contact allergen. Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Warshaw EM, Belsito DV, Taylor JS, et al. North American Contact Dermatitis Group patch test results: 2009 to 2010. Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society, North American Contact Dermatitis Group. Mar-Apr 2013;24(2):50–59Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Guin JD, Phillips D. Erythroderma from systemic contact dermatitis: a complication of systemic gentamicin in a patient with contact allergy to neomycin. Cutis. 1989;43(6):564–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hausermann P, Harr T, Bircher AJ. Baboon syndrome resulting from systemic drugs: is there strife between SDRIFE and allergic contact dermatitis syndrome? Contact Dermatitis. 2004;51(5–6):297–310.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Zug KA, Warshaw EM, Fowler JF, Jr., et al. Patch-test results of the North American Contact Dermatitis Group 2005–2006. Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society, North American Contact Dermatitis Group. May-Jun 2009;20(3):149–160Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Sharma AD. Relationship between nickel allergy and diet. Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol. 2007;73(5):307–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Brandao MH, Gontijo B, Girundi MA, de Castro MC. Ear piercing as a risk factor for contact allergy to nickel. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2010;86(2):149–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    • Thyssen JP. Nickel and cobalt allergy before and after nickel regulation--evaluation of a public health intervention. Contact Dermatitis. 2011;65 Suppl 1:1–68. Investigated the presence of nickel and cobalt in consumer items after the implementation of the EU nickel directive and demonstrated decreased rates of nickel allergy in females.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cadosch D, Chan E, Gautschi OP, Simmen HP, Filgueira L. Bio-corrosion of stainless steel by osteoclasts–in vitro evidence. J Orthop Res : Off Publ Orthop Res Soc. 2009;27(7):841–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Okazaki Y, Gotoh E, Manabe T, Kobayashi K. Comparison of metal concentrations in rat tibia tissues with various metallic implants. Biomaterials. 2004;25(28):5913–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dorr LD, Bloebaum R, Emmanual J, Meldrum R. Histologic, biochemical, and ion analysis of tissue and fluids retrieved during total hip arthroplasty. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 1990;261:82–95.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Jacobs JJ, Skipor AK, Patterson LM, et al. Metal release in patients who have had a primary total hip arthroplasty. A prospective, controlled, longitudinal study. J Bone Joint Surg Br. 1998;80(10):1447–58. American volume.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Savarino L, Granchi D, Ciapetti G, et al. Ion release in patients with metal-on-metal hip bearings in total joint replacement: a comparison with metal-on-polyethylene bearings. J Biomed Mater Res. 2002;63(5):467–74.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Urban RM, Jacobs JJ, Tomlinson MJ, Gavrilovic J, Black J, Peoc'h M. Dissemination of wear particles to the liver, spleen, and abdominal lymph nodes of patients with hip or knee replacement. J Bone Joint Surg Am Vol. 2000;82(4):457–76.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Cadosch D, Chan E, Gautschi OP, Filgueira L. Metal is not inert: role of metal ions released by biocorrosion in aseptic loosening–current concepts. J Biomed Mater Res Part A. 2009;91(4):1252–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Honari G, Ellis SG, Wilkoff BL, Aronica MA, Svensson LG, Taylor JS. Hypersensitivity reactions associated with endovascular devices. Contact Dermatitis. 2008;59(1):7–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Thomas P, Summer B, Sander CA, Przybilla B, Thomas M, Naumann T. Intolerance of osteosynthesis material: evidence of dichromate contact allergy with concomitant oligoclonal T-cell infiltrate and TH1-type cytokine expression in the peri-implantar tissue. Allergy. 2000;55(10):969–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gamerdinger K, Moulon C, Karp DR, et al. A new type of metal recognition by human T cells: contact residues for peptide-independent bridging of T cell receptor and major histocompatibility complex by nickel. J Exp Med. 2003;197(10):1345–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Messer RL, Wataha JC, Lewis JB, Lockwood PE, Caughman GB, Tseng WY. Effect of vascular stent alloys on expression of cellular adhesion molecules by endothelial cells. J Long-Term Eff Med Implants. 2005;15(1):39–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Hallab NJ, Jacobs JJ. Biologic effects of implant debris. Bull NYU Hosp Joint Dis. 2009;67(2):182–8.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Granchi D, Ciapetti G, Savarino L, et al. Effects of bone cement extracts on the cell-mediated immune response. Biomaterials. 2002;23(4):1033–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Watters TS, Cardona DM, Menon KS, Vinson EN, Bolognesi MP, Dodd LG. Aseptic lymphocyte-dominated vasculitis-associated lesion: a clinicopathologic review of an underrecognized cause of prosthetic failure. Am J Clin Pathol. 2010;134(6):886–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Greenfield EM, Beidelschies MA, Tatro JM, Goldberg VM, Hise AG. Bacterial pathogen-associated molecular patterns stimulate biological activity of orthopaedic wear particles by activating cognate Toll-like receptors. J Biol Chem. 2010;285(42):32378–84.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Takagi M, Tamaki Y, Hasegawa H, et al. Toll-like receptors in the interface membrane around loosening total hip replacement implants. J Biomed Mater Res Part A. 2007;81(4):1017–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schmidt M, Raghavan B, Muller V, et al. Crucial role for human Toll-like receptor 4 in the development of contact allergy to nickel. Nat Immunol. 2010;11(9):814–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
  39. 39.
  40. 40.
    Tilsley DA, Rotstein H. Sensitivity caused by internal exposure to nickel, chrome and cobalt. Contact Dermatitis. 1980;6(3):175–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Benson MK, Goodwin PG, Brostoff J. Metal sensitivity in patients with joint replacement arthroplasties. Br Med J. 1975;4(5993):374–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Elves MW, Wilson JN, Scales JT, Kemp HB. Incidence of metal sensitivity in patients with total joint replacements. Brit Med J. 1975;4(5993):376–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Gawkrodger DJ. Nickel sensitivity and the implantation of orthopaedic prostheses. Contact Dermatitis. 1993;28(5):257–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Thomas RH, Rademaker M, Goddard NJ, Munro DD. Severe eczema of the hands due to an orthopaedic plate made of Vitallium. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed). 1987;294(6564):106–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Hallab N, Merritt K, Jacobs JJ. Metal sensitivity in patients with orthopaedic implants. J Bone Joint Surg Am Vol. 2001;83-A(3):428–36.Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Thomas P, Bandl WD, Maier S, Summer B, Przybilla B. Hypersensitivity to titanium osteosynthesis with impaired fracture healing, eczema, and T-cell hyperresponsiveness in vitro: case report and review of the literature. Contact Dermatitis. 2006;55(4):199–202.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Jacobs JJ, Urban RM, Hallab NJ, Skipor AK, Fischer A, Wimmer MA. Metal-on-metal bearing surfaces. J Am Acad Orthop Surg. 2009;17(2):69–76.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Back DL, Young DA, Shimmin AJ. How do serum cobalt and chromium levels change after metal-on-metal hip resurfacing? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2005;438:177–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Gleizes V, Poupon J, Lazennec JY, Chamberlin B, Saillant G. [Value and limits of determining serum cobalt levels in patients with metal on metal articulating prostheses]. Rev Chir Orthop Reparatrice Appar Mot. 1999;85(3):217–25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    MacDonald SJ, McCalden RW, Chess DG, et al. Metal-on-metal versus polyethylene in hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2003;406:282–96.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Schaffer AW, Pilger A, Engelhardt C, Zweymueller K, Ruediger HW. Increased blood cobalt and chromium after total hip replacement. J Toxicol Clin Toxicol. 1999;37(7):839–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    • Basko-Plluska JL, Thyssen JP, Schalock PC. Cutaneous and systemic hypersensitivity reactions to metallic implants. Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society, North American Contact Dermatitis Group. Mar-Apr 2011;22(2):65–79. A very thorough review of metal allergy to orthopedic implants, gynecologic implants, and cardiac stents. Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Ridley CM. How relevant is cobalt sensitivity in a patient with an unsatisfactory total knee replacement? Clin Exp Dermatol. 1977;2(4):401–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Munro-Ashman D, Miller AJ. Rejection of metal to metal prosthesis and skin sensitivity to cobalt. Contact Dermatitis. 1976;2(2):65–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Symeonides PP, Paschaloglou C, Papageorgiou S. An allergic reaction after internal fixation of a fracture using a vitallium plate. J Allergy Clin Immunol. 1973;51(4):251–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Mikhael MM, Hanssen AD, Sierra RJ. Failure of metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty mimicking hip infection. A report of two cases. J Bone Joint Surg Am Vol. 2009;91(2):443–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Campbell P, Shimmin A, Walter L, Solomon M. Metal sensitivity as a cause of groin pain in metal-on-metal hip resurfacing. J Arthroplast. 2008;23(7):1080–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Jensen P, Thyssen JP, Retpen JB, Menne T. Cobalt allergy and suspected aseptic lymphocyte-dominated vascular-associated lesion following total hip arthroplasty. Contact Dermatitis. 2009;61(4):238–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Reed KB, Davis MD, Nakamura K, Hanson L, Richardson DM. Retrospective evaluation of patch testing before or after metal device implantation. Arch Dermatol. 2008;144(8):999–1007.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Kieffer M. Nickel sensitivity: relationship between history and patch test reaction. Contact Dermatitis. 1979;5(6):398–401.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Carlsson A, Moller H. Implantation of orthopaedic devices in patients with metal allergy. Acta Derm Venereol. 1989;69(1):62–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA : J Am Med Assoc. 2000;283(15):2008–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Granchi D, Cenni E, Giunti A, Baldini N. Metal hypersensitivity testing in patients undergoing joint replacement: a systematic review. J Bone Joint Surg Brit Vol. 2012;94(8):1126–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Granchi D, Cenni E, Trisolino G, Giunti A, Baldini N. Sensitivity to implant materials in patients undergoing total hip replacement. J Biomed Mater Res Part B Appl Biomater. 2006;77(2):257–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Frigerio E, Pigatto PD, Guzzi G, Altomare G. Metal sensitivity in patients with orthopaedic implants: a prospective study. Contact Dermatitis. 2011;64(5):273–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Krecisz B, Kiec-Swierczynska M, Chomiczewska-Skora D. Allergy to orthopedic metal implants - a prospective study. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2012;25(4):463–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Bircher A, Friederich NF, Seelig W, Scherer K. Allergic complications from orthopaedic joint implants: the role of delayed hypersensitivity to benzoyl peroxide in bone cement. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;66(1):20–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    •• Schalock PC, Menne T, Johansen JD, et al. Hypersensitivity reactions to metallic implants - diagnostic algorithm and suggested patch test series for clinical use. Contact Dermatitis. 2012;66(1):4–19. A very useful review with information on patch testing in patients with suspected metal allergy due to biomedical devices.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Thyssen JP, Jakobsen SS, Engkilde K, Johansen JD, Soballe K, Menne T. The association between metal allergy, total hip arthroplasty, and revision. Acta Orthop. 2009;80(6):646–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Koster R, Vieluf D, Kiehn M, et al. Nickel and molybdenum contact allergies in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis. Lancet. 2000;356(9245):1895–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Iijima R, Ikari Y, Amiya E, et al. The impact of metallic allergy on stent implantation: metal allergy and recurrence of in-stent restenosis. Int J Cardiol. 2005;104(3):319–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Hillen U, Haude M, Erbel R, Goos M. Evaluation of metal allergies in patients with coronary stents. Contact Dermatitis. 2002;47(6):353–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Norgaz T, Hobikoglu G, Serdar ZA, et al. Is there a link between nickel allergy and coronary stent restenosis? Tohoku J Exp Med. 2005;206(3):243–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Saito T, Hokimoto S, Oshima S, Noda K, Kojyo Y, Matsunaga K. Metal allergic reaction in chronic refractory in-stent restenosis. Cardiovasc Revascularization Med: Incl Mol Interv. 2009;10(1):17–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Hansen PR, Ahlehoff O, Gislason GH, Galloe AM, Menne T, Thyssen JP. Absence of metal allergy in patients with very late drug-eluting stent thrombosis: a pilot study. Int J Cardiol. 2010;145(3):629–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Groot ACd. Patch testing : test concentrations and vehicles for 3700 chemicals. 2nd ed. Amsterdam ; New York: Elsevier; 1994Google Scholar
  77. 77.
    Keane FM, Morris SD, Smith HR, Rycroft RJ. Allergy in coronary in-stent restenosis. Lancet. 2001;357(9263):1205–6. author reply 1206–1207.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Kastrati A, Schomig A, Dirschinger J, et al. Increased risk of restenosis after placement of gold-coated stents: results of a randomized trial comparing gold-coated with uncoated steel stents in patients with coronary artery disease. Circulation. 2000;101(21):2478–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Park SJ, Lee CW, Hong MK, et al. Comparison of gold-coated NIR stents with uncoated NIR stents in patients with coronary artery disease. Am J Cardiol. 2002;89(7):872–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    vom Dahl J, Haager PK, Grube E, et al. Effects of gold coating of coronary stents on neointimal proliferation following stent implantation. Am J Cardiol. 2002;89(7):801–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Svedman C, Tillman C, Gustavsson CG, Moller H, Frennby B, Bruze M. Contact allergy to gold in patients with gold-plated intracoronary stents. Contact Dermatitis. 2005;52(4):192–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Ekqvist S, Svedman C, Moller H, et al. High frequency of contact allergy to gold in patients with endovascular coronary stents. Br J Dermatol. 2007;157(4):730–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Virmani R, Guagliumi G, Farb A, et al. Localized hypersensitivity and late coronary thrombosis secondary to a sirolimus-eluting stent: should we be cautious? Circulation. 2004;109(6):701–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Nebeker JR, Virmani R, Bennett CL, et al. Hypersensitivity cases associated with drug-eluting coronary stents: a review of available cases from the Research on Adverse Drug Events and Reports (RADAR) project. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2006;47(1):175–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    FDA Document-Amplatzer. Summary of Safety and Probable Benefit. 2000; http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/01/briefing/3790b1_03_sponsorss&e.pdf. Accessed 5/1/2013
  86. 86.
    FDA Document: CardioSEALO Septal Occlusion System with Qwik LoadO Summary of Safety and Effectiveness Data. 2001Google Scholar
  87. 87.
    Ries MW, Kampmann C, Rupprecht HJ, Hintereder G, Hafner G, Meyer J. Nickel release after implantation of the Amplatzer occluder. Am Hear J. 2003;145(4):737–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Singh HR, Turner DR, Forbes TJ. Nickel allergy and the amplatzer septal occluder. J Invasive Cardiol. 2004;16(11):681–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Fukahara K, Minami K, Reiss N, Fassbender D, Koerfer R. Systemic allergic reaction to the percutaneous patent foramen ovale occluder. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2003;125(1):213–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Raque C, Goldschmidt H. Dermatitis associated with an implanted cardiac pacemaker. Arch Dermatol. 1970;102(6):646–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    Ishii K, Kodani E, Miyamoto S, et al. Pacemaker contact dermatitis: The effective use of a polytetrafluoroethylene sheet. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol: PACE. 2006;29(11):1299–302.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    Weiss R. Pacemaker dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1989;21(5):343–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Buchet S, Blanc D, Humbert P, et al. Pacemaker dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis. 1992;26(1):46–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Tamenishi A, Usui A, Oshima H, Ueda Y. Entirely polytetrafluoroethylene coating for pacemaker system contact dermatitis. Interact Cardiovasc Thorac Surg. 2008;7(2):275–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Yashiro B, Shoda M, Tomizawa Y, Manaka T, Hagiwara N. Long-term results of a cardiovascular implantable electronic device wrapped with an expanded polytetrafluoroethylene sheet. J Artif Organs: Off J Jpn Soc Artif Organs. 2012;15(3):244–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  96. 96.
    Andrews ID, Scheinman P. Systemic hypersensitivity reaction (without cutaneous manifestations) to an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society, North American Contact Dermatitis Group. May 2011;22(3):161–164Google Scholar
  97. 97.
    Oprea ML, Schnoring H, Sachweh JS, Ott H, Biertz J, Vazquez-Jimenez JF. Allergy to pacemaker silicone compounds: recognition and surgical management. Ann Thorac Surg. 2009;87(4):1275–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. 98.
    Rushing GD, Goretsky MJ, Gustin T, Morales M, Kelly Jr RE, Nuss D. When it is not an infection: metal allergy after the Nuss procedure for repair of pectus excavatum. J Pediatr Surg. 2007;42(1):93–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  99. 99.
    Castellani C, Schalamon J, Saxena AK, Hoellwarth ME. Early complications of the Nuss procedure for pectus excavatum: a prospective study. Pediatr Surg Int. 2008;24(6):659–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Aneja S, Taylor JS, Soldes O, DiFiore J. Dermatitis in patients undergoing the Nuss procedure for correction of pectus excavatum. Contact Dermatitis. 2011;65(6):317–21.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Ditrichova D, Kapralova S, Tichy M, et al. Oral lichenoid lesions and allergy to dental materials. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ Palacky Olomouc Czech Repub. 2007;151(2):333–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. 102.
    Issa Y, Duxbury AJ, Macfarlane TV, Brunton PA. Oral lichenoid lesions related to dental restorative materials. Br Dent J. 2005;198(6):361–6. disussion 549; quiz 372.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    McParland H, Warnakulasuriya S. Oral lichenoid contact lesions to mercury and dental amalgam–a review. J Biomed Biotechnol. 2012;2012:589569.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Raap U, Stiesch M, Reh H, Kapp A, Werfel T. Investigation of contact allergy to dental metals in 206 patients. Contact Dermatitis. 2009;60(6):339–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Khamaysi Z, Bergman R, Weltfriend S. Positive patch test reactions to allergens of the dental series and the relation to the clinical presentations. Contact Dermatitis. 2006;55(4):216–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Szyfelbein Masterpol K, Gottlieb AB, Scheinman PL. Systemic contact dermatitis presenting as lichen planus of the lip. Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society, North American Contact Dermatitis Group. Jul-Aug 2010;21(4):218–219Google Scholar
  107. 107.
    Pigatto PD, Zerboni R, Guzzi G. Local and systemic allergic contact dermatitis due to dental alloys. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2008;22(1):124–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Shimizu T, Kobayashi S, Tanaka M. Systemic contact dermatitis to zinc in dental fillings. Clin Exp Dermatol. 2003;28(6):675–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Saito N, Yamane N, Matsumura W, et al. Generalized exacerbation of systemic allergic dermatitis due to zinc patch test and dental treatments. Contact Dermatitis. 2010;62(6):372–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Pigatto PD, Guzzi G. Systemic contact dermatitis from nickel associated with orthodontic appliances. Contact Dermatitis. 2004;50(2):100–1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Kerosuo H, Kanerva L. Systemic contact dermatitis caused by nickel in a stainless steel orthodontic appliance. Contact Dermatitis. 1997;36(2):112–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Hubler Jr WR, Hubler Sr WR. Dermatitis from a chromium dental plate. Contact Dermatitis. 1983;9(5):377–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    Purello D'Ambrosio F, Ricciardi L, Isola S, et al. Systemic contact dermatitis to copper-containing IUD. Allergy. 1996;51(9):658–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Zurawin RK, Zurawin JL. Adverse events due to suspected nickel hypersensitivity in patients with essure micro-inserts. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2011;18(4):475–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Bibas N, Lassere J, Paul C, Aquilina C, Giordano-Labadie F. Nickel-induced systemic contact dermatitis and intratubal implants: the baboon syndrome revisited. Dermatitis : contact, atopic, occupational, drug : official journal of the American Contact Dermatitis Society, North American Contact Dermatitis Group. Jan-Feb 2013;24(1):35–36Google Scholar
  116. 116.
    Al-Safi Z, Shavell VI, Katz LE, Berman JM. Nickel hypersensitivity associated with an intratubal microinsert system. Obstet Gynecol. 2011;117(2 Pt 2):461–2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Josefson A, Farm G, Meding B. Validity of self-reported nickel allergy. Contact Dermatitis. 2010;62(5):289–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Thyssen JP, Menne T, Schalock PC, Taylor JS, Maibach HI. Pragmatic approach to the clinical work-up of patients with putative allergic disease to metallic orthopaedic implants before and after surgery. Br J Dermatol. 2011;164(3):473–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Treudler R, Simon JC. Benzoyl peroxide: is it a relevant bone cement allergen in patients with orthopaedic implants? Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57(3):177–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Haddad FS, Cobb AG, Bentley G, Levell NJ, Dowd PM. Hypersensitivity in aseptic loosening of total hip replacements. The role of constituents of bone cement. J Bone Joint Surg Brit Vol. 1996;78(4):546–9.Google Scholar
  121. 121.
    Mowad CM. Practice gap: the role of patch testing in the selection and management of metal device implants. Arch Dermatol. 2012;148(6):693–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Lai DW, Saver JL, Araujo JA, Reidl M, Tobis J. Pericarditis associated with nickel hypersensitivity to the Amplatzer occluder device: a case report. Catheter Cardiovasc Interv. 2005;66(3):424–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Section of Allergy and Clinical ImmunologyWinthrop-University HospitalMineolaUSA
  2. 2.Rheumatology, Allergy & ImmunologyWinthrop University HospitalMineolaUSA

Personalised recommendations