Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Allergy to Surgical Implants

  • Published:
Clinical Reviews in Allergy & Immunology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Surgical implants are essential elements of repair procedures to correct worn out joints, damaged spinal components, heart and vascular disease, and chronic pain. However, many of the materials that provide stability, flexibility, and durability to the implants are also immunogenic. Fortunately, allergic responses to surgical implants are infrequent. When they do occur, however, the associated pain, swelling, inflammation, and decreased range of motion can significantly impair the implant function. Given the high numbers of joint replacements performed in the developed world, allergic reactions to orthopedic implants form the largest category of allergic responses. The most important allergens in this category include nickel, cobalt, chromium, and bone cement. These allergens are also the most important in reactions to spinal surgeries. Multiple cardiac and neurostimulatory devices are constructed of metals and adhesives that can be sensitizing in some individuals. Implantable pulse generators, important in cardiac pacemakers, gastric stimulators, and neurostimulators, may include components made of stainless steel, titanium alloy, platinum and iridium, epoxy resins, poly methyl methacrylates, and isocyanates, all of which are immunogenic in some patients. Cardiac stents and patches are often made of Nitinol, a composite of nickel and titanium. More surgical procedures are closed using skin glues, which are also capable of triggering a blistering contact dermatitis. Patch testing is the gold standard to determine sensitization, and this review provides a list of standard allergens to test for different implants. The patients most appropriate for testing include (1) pre-operative joint replacement patients with a prior history of skin reactions to metal jewelry, jean snaps, watch bands, metal glass frames, artificial nails, or skin glue; (2) post-operative joint replacement failure patients needing revision without an obvious cause such as infection or mechanical incompatibility; and (3) post-operative cardiac or neurological patients with localized rash, pain, swelling, or inflammation near or over the implant.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cram P, Lu X, Kaboli PJ et al (2011) Clinical characteristics and outcomes of Medicare patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty, 1991–2008. JAMA 305:1560–1567

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Cram P, Lu X, Kates SL, Singh JA, Li Y, Wolf BR (2012) Total knee arthroplasty volume, utilization, and outcomes among Medicare beneficiaries, 1991–2010. JAMA 308:1227–1236

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. Maradit Kremers H, Larson DR, Crowson CS et al (2015) Prevalence of total hip and knee replacement in the United States. J Bone Joint Surg Am 97:1386–1397

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ibrahim SA, Kim H, McConnell KJ (2016) The CMS comprehensive care model and racial disparity in joint replacement. JAMA 316:1258–1259

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Hawker GA, Badley EM, Croxford R et al (2009) A population-based nested case-control study of the costs of hip and knee replacement surgery. Med Care 47:732–741

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Rasanen P, Paavolainen P, Sintonen H et al (2007) Effectiveness of hip or knee replacement surgery in terms of quality-adjusted life years and costs. Acta Orthop 78:108–115

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Daigle ME, Weinstein AM, Katz JN, Losina E (2012) The cost-effectiveness of total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review of published literature. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol 26:649–658

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Nwachukwu BU, Bozic KJ, Schairer WW et al (2015) Current status of cost utility analyses in total joint arthroplasty: a systematic review. Clin Orthop Relat Res 473:1815–1827

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. AAOS (2017) American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) to launch family of orthopaedic registries. http://newsroom.aaos.org/media-resources/news/american-academy-of-orthopaedic-surgeons-aaos-to-launch-family-of-orthopaedic-registries.htm#/search/aaos18/contact_type_id/14763690. Accessed 01/22/2018.

  10. Ong KL, Mowat FS, Chan N, Lau E, Halpern MT, Kurtz SM (2006) Economic burden of revision hip and knee arthroplasty in Medicare enrollees. Clin Orthop Relat Res 446:22–28

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Labek G, Thaler M, Janda W, Agreiter M, Stockl B (2011) Revision rates after total joint replacement: cumulative results from worldwide joint register datasets. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 93:293–297

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Labek G, Todorov S, Iovanescu L, Stoica CI, Bohler N (2013) Outcome after total ankle arthroplasty-results and findings from worldwide arthroplasty registers. Int Orthop 37:1677–1682

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Dummit LA, Kahvecioglu D, Marrufo G et al (2016) Association between hospital participation in a Medicare bundled payment initiative and payments and quality outcomes for lower extremity joint replacement episodes. JAMA 316:1267–1278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Sharkey PF, Lichstein PM, Shen C, Tokarski AT, Parvizi J (2014) Why are total knee arthroplasties failing today—has anything changed after 10 years? J Arthroplast 29:1774–1778

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Jafari SM, Coyle C, Mortazavi SM, Sharkey PF, Parvizi J (2010) Revision hip arthroplasty: infection is the most common cause of failure. Clin Orthop Relat Res 468:2046–2051

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Delaunay C, Hamadouche M, Girard J, Duhamel A (2013) So FG. What are the causes for failures of primary hip arthroplasties in France? Clin Orthop Relat Res 471:3863–3869

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Evans EM, Freeman MA, Miller AJ, Vernon-Roberts B (1974) Metal sensitivity as a cause of bone necrosis and loosening of the prosthesis in total joint replacement. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 56-B:626–642

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Elves MW, Wilson JN, Scales JT, Kemp HB (1975) Incidence of metal sensitivity in patients with total joint replacements. Br Med J 4:376–378

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Thienpont E, Berger Y (2013) No allergic reaction after TKA in a chrome-cobalt-nickel-sensitive patient: case report and review of the literature. Knee Surg Sports Traumatol Arthrosc 21:636–640

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Granchi D, Cenni E, Trisolino G, Giunti A, Baldini N (2005) Sensitivity to implant materials in patients undergoing total hip replacement. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater 77:257–264

    Google Scholar 

  21. Krecisz B, Kiec-Swierczynska M, Chomiczewska-Skora D (2012) Allergy to orthopedic metal implants—a prospective study. Int J Occup Med Environ Health 25:463–469

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Eben R, Dietrich KA, Nerz C et al (2010) Contact allergy to metals and bone cement components in patients with intolerance of arthroplasty. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 135:1418–1422

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Atanaskova Mesinkovska N, Tellez A, Molina L et al (2012) The effect of patch testing on surgical practices and outcomes in orthopedic patients with metal implants. Arch Dermatol 148:687–693

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Thomas P, Braathen LR, Dorig M et al (2009) Increased metal allergy in patients with failed metal-on-metal hip arthroplasty and peri-implant T-lymphocytic inflammation. Allergy 64:1157–1165

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Treudler R, Simon JC (2007) Benzoyl peroxide: is it a relevant bone cement allergen in patients with orthopaedic implants? Contact Dermatitis 57:177–180

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Edwards SA, Gardiner J (2007) Hypersensitivity to benzoyl peroxide in a cemented total knee arthroplasty: cement allergy. J Arthroplast 22:1226–1228

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Bircher A, Friederich NF, Seelig W, Scherer K (2012) Allergic complications from orthopaedic joint implants: the role of delayed hypersensitivity to benzoyl peroxide in bone cement. Contact Dermatitis 66:20–26

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Haddad FS, Cobb AG, Bentley G, Levell NJ, Dowd PM (1996) Hypersensitivity in aseptic loosening of total hip replacements. The role of constituents of bone cement. J Bone Joint Surg (Br) 78:546–549

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Erpenbach J, Hofmeister E (2008) Hypersensitivity to polymethylmethacrylate following shoulder hemiarthroplasty. Orthopedics 31:708

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Anand A, McGlynn F, Jiranek W (2009) Metal hypersensitivity: can it mimic infection? J Arthroplast 24:826 e825–826 e828

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Willert HG, Buchhorn GH, Fayyazi A et al (2005) Metal-on-metal bearings and hypersensitivity in patients with artificial hip joints. A clinical and histomorphological study. J Bone Joint Surg Am 87:28–36

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Thomas P, von der Helm C, Schopf C et al (2015) Patients with intolerance reactions to total knee replacement: combined assessment of allergy diagnostics, periprosthetic histology, and peri-implant cytokine expression pattern. Biomed Res Int 2015:910156

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Mahendra G, Pandit H, Kliskey K, Murray D, Gill HS, Athanasou N (2009) Necrotic and inflammatory changes in metal-on-metal resurfacing hip arthroplasties. Acta Orthop 80:653–659

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Koster R, Vieluf D, Kiehn M et al (2000) Nickel and molybdenum contact allergies in patients with coronary in-stent restenosis. Lancet 356:1895–1897

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Saito T, Hokimoto S, Oshima S, Noda K, Kojyo Y, Matsunaga K (2009) Metal allergic reaction in chronic refractory in-stent restenosis. Cardiovasc Revasc Med 10:17–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Banerji A, Lax T, Guyer A, Hurwitz S, Camargo CA Jr, Long AA (2014) Management of hypersensitivity reactions to Carboplatin and Paclitaxel in an outpatient oncology infusion center: a 5-year review. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 2:428–433

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Pfoch L, Mahler V, Sticherling M (2009) Drug-eluting coronary stents: hypersensitivity reactions to paclitaxel. A case report. Dermatology 218:52–55

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Nakazawa G (2011) Stent thrombosis of drug eluting stent: pathological perspective. J Cardiol 58:84–91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Svedman C, Moller H, Gruvberger B et al (2014) Implants and contact allergy: are sensitizing metals released as haptens from coronary stents? Contact Dermatitis 71:92–97

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Halwani DO, Anderson PG, Lemons JE, Jordan WD, Anayiotos AS, Brott BC (2010) In-vivo corrosion and local release of metallic ions from vascular stents into surrounding tissue. J Invasive Cardiol 22:528–535

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Svedman C, Ekqvist S, Moller H et al (2009) A correlation found between contact allergy to stent material and restenosis of the coronary arteries. Contact Dermatitis 60:158–164

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Thyssen JP, Engkilde K, Menne T, Johansen JD, Hansen PR, Gislason GH (2011) No association between metal allergy and cardiac in-stent restenosis in patients with dermatitis—results from a linkage study. Contact Dermatitis 64:138–141

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Gimenez-Arnau A, Riambau V, Serra-Baldrich E, Camarasa JG (2000) Metal-induced generalized pruriginous dermatitis and endovascular surgery. Contact Dermatitis 43:35–40

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Guerra A, Kirkwood M (2017) Severe generalized dermatitis in a nickel-allergic patient with a popliteal artery nitinol stent. J Vasc Surg Cases Innov Tech 3:23–25

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Jetty P, Jayaram S, Veinot J, Pratt M (2013) Superficial femoral artery nitinol stent in a patient with nickel allergy. J Vasc Surg 58:1388–1390

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. D’Arrigo G, Giaquinta A, Virgilio C, Davi A, Pierfrancesco V, Veroux M (2014) Nickel allergy in a patient with a nitinol stent in the superficial femoral artery. J Vasc Interv Radiol 25:1304–1306

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Khan SF, Sherbondy MA, Ormsby A, Velanovich V (2007) Occlusion of metallic biliary stent related to nickel allergy. Gastrointest Endosc 66:413–414

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Prestipino F, Pragliola C, Lusini M, Chello M (2014) Nickel allergy induced systemic reaction to an intracardiac amplatzer device. J Card Surg 29:349–350

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Spina R, Muller DW, Jansz P, Gunalingam B (2016) Nickel hypersensitivity reaction following Amplatzer atrial septal defect occluder device deployment successfully treated by explantation of the device. Int J Cardiol 223:242–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Rigatelli G, Cardaioli P, Giordan M et al (2007) Nickel allergy in interatrial shunt device-based closure patients. Congenit Heart Dis 2:416–420

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Kang J, Simpson CS, Campbell D et al (2013) Cardiac rhythm device contact dermatitis. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol 18:79–83

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Citerne O, Gomes S, Scanu P, Milliez P (2011) Painful Eczema mimicking pocket infection in a patient with an ICD: a rare cause of skin allergy to nickel/cobalt alloy. Circulation 123:1241–1242

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Andrews ID, Scheinman P (2011) Systemic hypersensitivity reaction (without cutaneous manifestations) to an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator. Dermatitis 22:161–164

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Abdallah HI, Balsara RK, O’Riordan AC (1994) Pacemaker contact sensitivity: clinical recognition and management. Ann Thorac Surg 57:1017–1018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Delaplace M, Maitre F, Dufour T et al (2010) Two cases of cutaneous erythema following spinal cord stimulation. Ann Dermatol Venereol 137:297–300

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Taverner MG (2013) A case of an allergic reaction to a spinal cord stimulator: identification of the antigen with epicutaneous patch testing, allowing successful reimplantation. Neuromodulation 16:595–599

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Schmidlin K, Verzwyvelt J, Bernstein D, Kim H (2015) Probable delayed-type hypersensitivity to nickel-containing cerebral aneurysm clip associated with neurologic deficits. J Allergy Clin Immunol Pract 3:609–611

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Gautschi OP, Schlett CL, Fournier JY, Cadosch D (2010) Laboratory confirmed polymethyl-methacrylate (Palacos)-hypersensitivity after cranioplasty. Clin Neurol Neurosurg 112:915–916

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. King L Jr, Fransway A, Adkins RB (1993) Chronic urticaria due to surgical clips. N Engl J Med 329:1583–1584

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Fage SW, Muris J, Jakobsen SS, Thyssen JP (2016) Titanium: a review on exposure, release, penetration, allergy, epidemiology, and clinical reactivity. Contact Dermatitis 74:323–345

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Keane FM, Morris SD, Smith HR, Rycroft RJ (2001) Allergy in coronary in-stent restenosis. Lancet 357:1205–1206 author reply 1206–1207

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Goon AT, Bruze M, Zimerson E et al (2011) Variation in allergen content over time of acrylates/methacrylates in patch test preparations. Br J Dermatol 164:116–124

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Goon AT, Bruze M, Zimerson E et al (2011) Correlation between stated and measured concentrations of acrylate and methacrylate allergens in patch-test preparations. Dermatitis 22:27–32

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Pacheco K, Barker L, Maier L, Erb S, Sills M, Knight V (2013) Development of a validated blood test for nickel sensitization. J Allergy Clin Immunol 132:767–769

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Environmental & Occupational Health Sciences, National Jewish Health, 1400 Jackson St., Denver, CO, 80206, USA

    Karin A. Pacheco

  2. Environmental & Occupational Health, University of Colorado School of Public Health Anschutz Medical Campus, 13001 E 17th Pl, Aurora, CO, 80045, USA

    Karin A. Pacheco

Authors
  1. Karin A. Pacheco
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Karin A. Pacheco.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pacheco, K.A. Allergy to Surgical Implants. Clinic Rev Allerg Immunol 56, 72–85 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12016-018-8707-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12016-018-8707-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation