Screening for symptomatic metal sensitivity: a prospective study of 92 patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty

Metal hypersensitivity in trapeziometacarpal arthroplasty: A systematic pattern of progression

Metal hypersensitivity is a rare and often underestimated complication, as shown by the small number of published studies, particularly concerning the upper limbs and the hand. However, the increase in the annual number of trapeziometacarpal arthroplasties underlines the importance of better understanding of this problem. We performed a study based on data from the revision of trapeziometacarpal prostheses to assess the incidence of this complication and to define a sequence of radiological changes to detect metal hypersensitivity. This single-center retrospective study included 37 patients operated on between January 2014 and November 2023 for revision of trapeziometacarpal prosthesis. Ten (27%) had no clearly identified cause of failure. For these 10 patients, we analyzed clinical data and postoperative X-rays. In the 11 revision arthroplasties, 2 patients had no symptoms or radiographic signs suggestive of allergy. Six patients had a-posteriori diagnosis established by allergy testing, which also identified 2 additional patients, for a total of 8 patients (21% of the initial cohort). In these cases, there was systematic metaphyseal osteolysis of the first metacarpal between 15 days and 1 month after implantation. Clinically, most patients had an asymptomatic period of 2 weeks to 1 month before onset of symptoms and osteolysis, often accompanied by local inflammation. This study found a reproducible pattern of progression, characterized by the appearance of radiographic signs of osteolysis in the first month, followed by clinical deterioration. Although this course is strongly suggestive of a metal hypersensitivity, it is crucial not to exclude the possibility of an infectious cause, which should always be considered.

Nickel allergy does not correlate with function after total knee arthroplasty

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to determine if there is a relationship between clinical outcomes and nickel allergy by evaluating asymptomatic total knee arthroplasty (TKA) patients with well-functioning implants through quantitative metal allergy (MA) testing.

METHODS

A prospective case series was performed on 50 patients with well-functioning TKA of various implant types. Inclusion criteria included primary TKA with a minimum 12-month follow-up and Oxford knee score (OKS) ≥ 40. A commercially available Lymphocyte Transformation Test measured the amount of a hypersensitivity lymphocyte immune response after exposure to a particular antigen. MA results were stratified based on the stimulation index (SI). The Cochran-Mantel-Haenzel test was used to test the homogeneity of metal reactivities. The Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test was used to compare individual metal SI by gender and the association of OKS and metal SI was ascertained with the Spearman correlation.

RESULTS

Nickel, cobalt, and chromium do not have the same reactivity scores (p < 0.001), and only nickel showed reactive/highly reactive scores. Females were found to have 3.41 times the odds of males for higher Ni reactivity (p = 0.0295, odds ratio [OR], 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.41 [1.13-10.3]) only. Clinically, there was no correlation between metal SI and OKS score by metal (Ni rho = -0.1779; Co rho = -0.0036; Cr rho = -0.1748).

CONCLUSION

This is the first study looking at MA in well-functioning TKA. There is no correlation between clinical results and nickel reactivity. Surgeons should exercise caution when revising a painful or poorly functioning TKA based solely on a 'positive' Nickel Allergy test and look for other possible reasons for failure.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II.

Do Patients With Hypoallergenic Total Knee Arthroplasty Implants for Metal Allergy Do Worse? An Analysis of Health Care Utilizations and Patient-Reported Outcome Measures

BACKGROUND

Metal allergy is a rare and controversial cause of implant failure and poor outcomes following total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Few studies have investigated clinical and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in patients treated with hypoallergenic implants. This investigation aimed to compare: (1) health care utilizations (eg, hospital length of stay, 90-day readmission rate, and incidence of nonhome discharge) and (2) 1-year PROMs between patients who received hypoallergenic and standard TKA implants.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of prospectively collected data from patients who underwent primary TKA between 2018 and 2019. Propensity score matching (3:1) was used to compare standard TKA patients with those who received hypoallergenic TKA implants, respectively. Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score (KOOS) pain, KOOS Physical function Shortform (PS), and Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey Mental Component Score were collected preoperatively and at 1-year. After matching, 190 hypoallergenic and 570 standard TKAs were analyzed.

RESULTS

No differences were observed in length of stay (P = .98), 90-day readmission (P = .89), and nonhome discharge (P = .82). Additionally, there was no significant difference in change from preoperative to 1-year PROMs (KOOS pain, P = .97; KOOS PS, P = .88; Veterans RAND 12-Item Health Survey Mental Component Score, P = .28). Patient-reported satisfaction was similar at 1-year (P = .23). Patients achieved similar rates of Patient Acceptable Symptom State (PASS) and minimal clinically important difference (MCID) for KOOS pain (PASS, P = .77; MCID, P = .33) and KOOS PS (PASS, P = .44; MCID, P = .65).

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with hypoallergenic TKA implants for suspected metal allergy had similar outcomes compared to patients who had standard implants and no metal allergy.

Roles of inflammatory cell infiltrate in periprosthetic osteolysis

Classically, particle-induced periprosthetic osteolysis at the implant-bone interface has explained the aseptic loosening of joint replacement. This response is preceded by triggering both the innate and acquired immune response with subsequent activation of osteoclasts, the bone-resorbing cells. Although particle-induced periprosthetic osteolysis has been considered a foreign body chronic inflammation mediated by myelomonocytic-derived cells, current reports describe wide heterogeneous inflammatory cells infiltrating the periprosthetic tissues. This review aims to discuss the role of those non-myelomonocytic cells in periprosthetic tissues exposed to wear particles by showing original data. Specifically, we discuss the role of T cells (CD3+, CD4+, and CD8+) and B cells (CD20+) coexisting with CD68+/TRAP- multinucleated giant cells associated with both polyethylene and metallic particles infiltrating retrieved periprosthetic membranes. This review contributes valuable insight to support the complex cell and molecular mechanisms behind the aseptic loosening theories of orthopedic implants.

Difficult Preoperative Diagnosis of Suspected Metal Hypersensitivity in a Case with Early Failure of Bipolar Hemiarthroplasty

Background

Metal hypersensitivity is a rare complication after total hip arthroplasty (THA), and no reliable diagnostic method for metal hypersensitivity to orthopedic metal implants has yet been established. Case report. A 57-year-old woman underwent hemiarthroplasty using a metal implant despite a skin allergy to metal jewelry. Two years after surgery, the patient developed early hemiarthroplasty failure and refractory erythema. Although the patient was clinically suspected to have a hypersensitivity to metal, the preoperative screening test was negative, and patient underwent revision surgery with cemented THA. Postoperatively, the erythema as well as her hip pain disappeared completely.

Conclusion

Patients with clinically suspected metal hypersensitivity should undergo primary and revision total hip arthroplasty using hypoallergenic implants regardless of preoperative screening results.

A comparison of clinical outcomes after total knee arthroplasty (TKA) in patients with preoperative nickel allergy receiving Cobalt-Chromium (CoCr) or Nickel-Free Implant

INTRODUCTION

The role of metal hypersensitivity reactions in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) failure is debated. There is no consensus on whether use of a more expensive nickel-free implant is indicated for patients who have pre-operative nickel allergy. The purpose of this study was to examine the outcome of patients who have pre-operative nickel allergy receiving nickel-free or cobalt chromium (CoCr) implants.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of 17,798 patients who underwent 20,324 unilateral primary TKAs between 2016 and 2020. Presence of pre-operative nickel allergy was determined (n=282). Patients were divided into 2 cohorts: those receiving (1) nickel-free or (2) CoCr implants. Clinical outcome scores and revision rates were assessed.

RESULTS

243 received a nickel-free implant and 39 received a CoCr implant. There was no significant difference in revision rate between the cohorts. Survivorship free of revision was 94% in the CoCr implant cohort and 98% in the nickel-free implant cohort (P=0.9). When comparing clinical outcome scores between cohorts, there was no difference in preoperative, 6-week or 1-year Knee Osteoarthritis Outcome Score Joint Replacement (KOOS JR.), Visual Analog Scale (VAS), Lower Extremity Activity Scale (LEAS), Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), and Veterans RAND 12-item (VR12) scores between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective cohort study, there was no difference in revision rates or clinical outcomes in patients who had a nickel allergy undergoing primary TKA with CoCr or nickel-free implants. Further studies are needed to determine if nickel allergy is an independent risk factor for worse TKA outcomes in general.

Titanium niobium nitride knee implants are not inferior to chrome cobalt components for primary total knee arthroplasty at medium-term follow-up

BACKGROUND

Oxidized zirconium (Oxinium), titanium nitride (TiN) or titanium niobium nitride (TiNbN) coated implants became in recent years available for an increasing amount of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) systems. The hypothesis of this study was that the use of TiNbN-coated components would not lead to inferior results compared to conventional implants and that none of the metal hypersensitivity patients receiving TiNbN-coated implants would require revision for metal allergy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective study compared 53 Titanium Niobium Nitride coated TKA with 103 conventional chrome cobalt implants of the same design. Patients were evaluated at a minimal follow-up of 3 years.

RESULTS

No differences in clinical, radiological or patient-reported outcome measurements were observed between these groups. A survivorship of 96% without differences in revision rates was observed at medium-term follow-up of 6.5 years.

DISCUSSION

Metal allergy leading to contact or generalized dermatitis after TKA is very rare and usually linked to chrome or cobalt hypersensitivity. Nickel release from knee implants has not been shown to lead to cutaneous symptoms, but unexplained pain and swelling, peri-prosthetic osteolysis and component loosening remain potential issues not fully understood. The use of coated implants eliminates this factor from the diagnostic equation in case of postoperative dissatisfaction.

CONCLUSION

The use of titanium niobium nitride coated implants for primary knee osteoarthritis in self-reported metal hypersensitivity patients shows similar outcomes and survivorship rates as conventional chrome cobalt TKA, with no revisions for allergy at medium-term follow-up.

Lymphocyte transformation test reveals low prevalence of true metal hypersensitivity among pre-operative total knee arthroplasty patients

PURPOSE

The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence of metal hypersensitivity, and identify pre-operative factors which could predict susceptibility to hypersensitivity reactions among patients scheduled for primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA). The present study used a testing method consistent with the recognised biological response to metals.

METHODS

A prospective cross-sectional analysis of 220 patients was conducted. All patients received a testing protocol using lymphocyte transformation test to evaluate reactivity to possible contents of orthopaedic implants. Test response is interpreted as stimulation index (SI) values. A comprehensive questionnaire was used to evaluate prior exposure. Patients were categorised according to SI values and the odds ratios (OR) were calculated as comparative effect measure for each predetermined prior exposure factor.

RESULTS

The prevalence of metal sensitivity response was 28% (n = 61) among patients with susceptibility to at least one agent (SI = 2 to 4.9), and 3.2% (n = 7) among patients with true hypersensitivity (SI ≥ 5). The population-weighted prevalence, adjusted for sampling weights of symptomatic knee osteoarthritis, was SI ≥ 5 = 4.7% (95% CI 0.4-11.8%) and SI ≥ 2 = 35.2% (95% CI 24.8-48.6%). Stimulation index levels of response to materials were markedly varied with the highest being aluminium. Female sex, smoking history, cutaneous reaction to jewellery, occupational exposure, and dental procedures were among factors shown to increase the odds of having higher reactivity response to tested metals. Nevertheless, patients with well-functioning prior contralateral TKA did not appear at greater risk of having either sensitivity or susceptibility with odds ratio (OR) = 0.2 (95% CI 0.01-3.2), p: NS and OR = 0.6 (95% CI 0.3-1.2), p: NS, respectively. Prior positive patch test was neither predictor of susceptibility to hypersensitivity OR = 1.2 (95% CI 0.6-2.6) p: NS nor predictor of true hypersensitivity OR = 0.7 (95% CI 0.08-6.1), p: NS.

CONCLUSION

Among patients scheduled for primary TKA with no prior clinical features of metal allergy the prevalence of true hypersensitivity to at least one metal is just over 3%. Patients are likely to encounter a material to which they have pre-existing susceptibility to hypersensitivity. With certain prior exposure factors, there was increased susceptibility to metal hypersensitivity reaction evoking an acquired condition.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level II, prospective cross-sectional study.

Clinical Results of Revision TKA in Patients With Presumed Metal and Cement Allergy

BACKGROUND

Metal and cement allergy affects a small subset of patients, causing severe pain and often systemic reaction after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Revision with ceramic-surfaced femoral components has been reported to resolve these symptoms of metal allergy, but no solution currently is available for patients with allergies to metal and bone cement.

METHODS

Five patients (5 knees) with documented metal allergy were revised with custom porous-coated ceramic femoral components (Magnesia-stabilized Zirconia) from January 2007 to January 2013. An additional 23 patients (23 knees) met inclusion criteria from 2007 to 2015, but because the ceramic implant was unavailable, they underwent different treatment based on their underlying allergy to metal, cement, or both. Inclusion criteria included the history of clinically documented severe metal allergy, severe pain, swelling, and effusion >1 year after TKA, negative workup for infection, loosening, and ligament imbalance. Knee Society scores were compared for each cohort.

RESULTS

Mean Knee Society scores for all 5 patients revised with custom cementless ceramic femoral components improved significantly for objective score (preoperative, 39 ± 5; most recent visit, 90 ± 2) and function score (preoperative, 33 ± 8; most recent visit 93 ± 4) (P < .0001). The 12 knees revised with off-the-shelf cemented ceramic-coated femoral components had similar results. The 7 unrevised knees (including 4 knees with allergy to metal and bone cement) and the 4 knees revised with standard CoCr femoral components did not improve and worsened over time.

CONCLUSION

Symptoms resolved in the 5 patients revised with custom ceramic implants and in the 12 patients revised with ceramic-coated components, but did not improve in the patients unrevised or revised with CoCr femoral components. Symptoms presumed to be associated with metal or cement allergy improve with the use of ceramic femoral surfaces, but patients who are allergic both to metals and bone cement would be candidates only for porous-coated ceramic implants fixed without bone cement.

Impact of Preoperative Metal Patch Testing on Surgery Using Metal Implants

Background

Patients scheduled for metal implant surgery in some facilities in Japan undergo preoperative metal patch testing (MPT). However, few studies have reported the impact of MPT results on scheduled surgery; therefore, the value of preoperative MPT remains unknown.

Material and methods

In analysis 1,the preoperative MPT results requested by orthopedic surgeons from 4 institutions from 2014 to 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. In analysis 2, the medical records of all patients who underwent total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, or total shoulder arthroplasty/reverse shoulder arthroplasty between 2014 and 2018 were collected. The number of patients who underwent MPT and their surgical results were analyzed.

Results

In analysis 1, MPT was performed on 72 patients during the study period. The overall MPT positivity rate was 26.4% for the entire cohort in analysis 1. In 4 out of 19 MPT-positive cases, the results of MPT changed the treatment plan to use alternative materials or cancel the surgery. In analysis 2, 1087 patients underwent total hip arthroplasty, total knee arthroplasty, and TSA/RSA; only 16 patients underwent MPT. Aseptic loosening occurred postoperatively in 3 patients (0.3%), none of whom had a history of allergy, and none underwent preoperative MPT.

Conclusion

Metal allergy did not appear to be directly involved in aseptic loosening to any large or meaningful degree in our patient cohort. Only 1.5% of the patients underwent preoperative MPT; therefore, our results suggest this testing had limited benefit or utility. Further studies are needed to determine whether MPT is necessary in preparation for joint replacement.

Metal Hypersensitivity or Missed Periprosthetic Joint Infection? A Critical Review

The World Association Against Infection in Orthopedics And Trauma (W.A.I.O.T.) Study Group on Bone And Joint Infection Definitions Metal hypersensitivity (MHS) has been investigated by several authors as a possible reason for painful total joint arthroplasty, with controversial results. Periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is another possible source of unexplained pain and implant failure that may be difficult to diagnose if not properly investigated. We performed this critical review to assess whether the current literature on MHS includes an adequate diagnostic workup to discern metal allergy from PJI. The results of this review highlight the importance of assessing patients for PJI before making a diagnosis of MHS and emphasize that the methods currently used to exclude PJI are substantially inadequate. Therefore, well-designed clinical trials with adequate diagnostic protocols and definitions of PJI that can differentiate MHS from low-grade PJI are needed. [Orthopedics. 2022;45(2):e73-e78.].

Metal allergy in primary and revision total knee arthroplasty : a scoping review and evidence-based practical approach

Aims

Metal allergy in knee arthroplasty patients is a controversial topic. We aimed to conduct a scoping review to clarify the management of metal allergy in primary and revision total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

Methods

Studies were identified by searching electronic databases: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE, and Embase, from their inception to November 2020, for studies evaluating TKA patients with metal hypersensitivity/allergy. All studies reporting on diagnosing or managing metal hypersensitivity in TKA were included. Data were extracted and summarized based on study design, study population, interventions and outcomes. A practical guide is then formulated based on the available evidence.

Results

We included 38 heterogeneous studies (two randomized controlled trials, six comparative studies, 19 case series, and 11 case reports). The evidence indicates that metal hypersensitivity is a rare complication with some histopathological features leading to pain and dissatisfaction with no reliable screening tests preoperatively. Hypoallergenic implants are viable alternatives for patients with self-reported/confirmed metal hypersensitivity if declared preoperatively; however, concerns remain over their long-term outcomes with ceramic implants outperforming titanium nitride-coated implants and informed consent is paramount. For patients presenting with painful TKA, metal hypersensitivity is a diagnosis of exclusion where patch skin testing, lymphocyte transformation test, and synovial biopsies are useful adjuncts before revision surgery is undertaken to hypoallergenic implants with shared decision-making and informed consent.

Conclusion

Using the limited available evidence in the literature, we provide a practical approach to metal hypersensitivity in TKA patients. Future national/registry-based studies are needed to identify the scale of metal hypersensitivity, agreed diagnostic criteria, and management strategies.

Cite this article: Bone Jt Open 2021;2(10):785–795.

Metal Hypersensitivity and Complex Regional Pain Syndrome After Bilateral Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Case Report

CASE

A 38-year-old man underwent bilateral total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and subsequently developed diffuse pain, swelling, and an eczematous rash that spread throughout his body. Despite various pharmacological regimens, sympathetic blocks, aggressive physical therapy, and further knee revisions, the patient's symptoms progressed over a period of 2 years. An in vitro memory lymphocyte immuno-stimulation assay test demonstrated reactivity to nickel after which bilateral revision TKAs with oxidized zirconium alloys resulted in symptomatic improvement.

CONCLUSION

Metal hypersensitivity should be considered after the exclusion of infection; however, the concurrent development of complex regional pain syndrome may mask the clinical presentation.

Systemic Contact Dermatitis: The Routes of Allergen Entry

Systemic contact dermatitis (SCD) is a generalized reactivation of type IV hypersensitivity skin diseases in individuals with previous sensitization after a contact allergen is administered systemically. Patients with SCD may consider their dermatitis unpredictable and recalcitrant since the causative allergens are difficult to find. If a patient has a pattern of dermatitis suggestive of SCD but fails to improve with conventional treatment, SCD should be taken into consideration. If doctors are not familiar with the presentations of SCD and the possible routes of allergen sensitization and exposure, the diagnosis of SCD may be delayed. In this work, we summarized all of the routes through which allergens can enter the body and cause SCD, including oral intake, local contact (through skin, inhalation, nasal spray and anal application), implants, and other iatrogenic or invasive routes (intravenous, intramuscular, intraarticular, and intravesicular). This will provide a comprehensive reference for the clinicians to identify the culprit of SCD.

Nickel Allergy: Epidemiology, Pathomechanism, Clinical Patterns, Treatment and Prevention Programs

Nickel is the most common cause of contact allergy in the general population and the most frequently detected allergen in patients patch tested for suspected allergic contact dermatitis (ACD). ACD from nickel is a typical type IV hypersensitivity. Nickel allergy is mostly caused by nonoccupational exposure, such as jewelry and clothing decorations, metal tools, medical devices (mainly orthopedic and orthodontic implants, cardiovascular prosthesis), eyeglasses, utensils, keys, pigment for paint, cosmetics, and food (mainly legumes, chocolate, salmon, peanuts). Occupational exposure can involve several workers (mechanics, metalworkers, platers, hairdressers, jewelers, workers in the constructions and electronic industries), classically involving hands and forearms. The classic clinical pattern of ACD caused by nickel is characterized by eczematous dermatitis involving the sites of direct contact with the metal. Non-eczematous-patterns are reported, including lichenoid dermatitis, granuloma annulare, vitiligo-like lesions, dyshidrosiform dermatitis, and vasculitis. In the case of systemic exposure to nickel, sensitized patients could develop systemic contact dermatitis. Patch testing represents the gold standard for the diagnosis of ACD from nickel. Treatment includes avoidance of contact with products containing nickel and the patient's education about the possible use of alternative products. A recent EU nickel directive, regulating the content and release of nickel from products, has caused a decrease of nickel contact allergy in some European countries. Nickel allergy is a relevant issue of public health with significant personal, social, and economic impact. This review summarizes epidemiology, pathomechanism, clinical patterns, treatment, and prevention programs.

Patch Test Results and Outcome in Patients with Complications from Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Consecutive Case Series

The role of hypersensitivity in implant-related complications remains controversial. The objectives of our study were to (1) establish the prevalence of hypersensitivity to components of knee prostheses in patients referred to our contact dermatitis clinic, (2) determine if patients with post-surgery dermatitis have become sensitized, and (3) describe the outcome of patients with and without hypersensitivity. We reviewed the charts of patients referred from 2007 to 2018 and extracted demographic information, date, type, and site of implant, clinical presentation, and results of patch testing (PT) or lymphocyte transformation tests (LTT). We called most patients to gather data such as clinical outcome, nature, and timing of additional surgery. Statistical analysis included computation of conventional descriptive statistics. Because of the type of study design, only some categorical variables were tested for possible associations by analytical tools (cross-tabulation). Thirty-nine patients, 23 men (59.0%), and 16 women (41.0%), were included. Their mean age in years was 63.3 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 60.9-65.7) ranging from 39.0 to 79.0, (standard deviation) = 9.69, without statistically significant differences between males and females. Five patients had positive PT possibly relevant to their implant. Four patients had revision surgery and two improved. Of nine patients with dermatitis, one with relevant PT did not improve after revision, and the dermatitis was unrelated to TKA in eight. Of the 26 patients without dermatitis or relevant PT results, 9 had revisions because of incapacitating symptoms, and 5 improved. Hypersensitivity to implant components is a potential factor in the etiology of TKA complications. Patients with confirmed hypersensitivity may benefit from revision. Our study, however, did not detect statistically significant differences in outcome of revision surgery between patients with positive versus negative PT or LTT. In spite of this, we consider that patients with a history suggestive of metal, acrylate or aminoglycoside allergy should be tested preoperatively to avoid hypersensitivity-related postoperative complications. In the absence of hypersensitivity, some patients with incapacitating symptoms may also improve following revision.

Early Outcomes of an Alternative Bearing Surface in Primary Total Knee Arthroplasty in Patients with Self-reported Metal Allergy

Background

Most implants for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are comprised of alloys that contain nickel. Controversy exists whether metal allergies produce negative effects and affect clinical outcomes. The purpose of this study was to retrospectively review a minimum 2-year follow-up with an ion-bombarded titanium TKA implant in patients with reported metal sensitivity.

Methods

A retrospective review of patients who underwent primary TKA with the ion-bombarded titanium Vanguard (Zimmer Biomet, Warsaw, IN) implant with 2-year minimum follow-up was performed from 2008 through 2017. The query revealed 346 patients (451 knees) with minimum 2-year follow-up. The mean age was 64.7 years, the mean body mass index was 35.1 kg/m², and 95% of patients were women.

Results

The mean follow-up was 4.6 years. The mean range of motion improved from 109° to 112° (P = .03), University of California Los Angeles activity scale from 4.1 to 5.1 (P < .001), Knee Society Clinical scores from 36 to 89 (P < .001), and Knee Society Functional scores from 48 to 73 (P < .001). There were 5 (1.1%) revisions: 2 infections (2-staged exchange), 1 tibial revision for aseptic loosening after a fall, and 2 bearing exchanges for instability. Other surgeries were open reduction internal fixation of periprosthetic fracture, 1 arthroscopic release of snapping popliteus, and 4 local wound incision and debridement (2 superficial infections and 2 nonhealing wounds). Manipulation under anesthesia was required in 27 (6%) patients.

Conclusions

These early results are encouraging for the use of alternative metal titanium alloy implants in metal-sensitive patients undergoing primary TKA. At 4.6 years of mean follow-up, patients had substantial improvement in the range of motion and clinical outcomes with a low frequency of revision.

Prevalence of metal hypersensitivity in patients with shoulder pathologies

BACKGROUND

To date, medical history and dedicated questionnaires are the fastest and easiest way to assess risks of joint metal hypersensitivity. No published studies determined the overall prevalence of hypersensitivity to metals in patients with shoulder pathologies. The purpose of this study was therefore to estimate the prevalence of metal hypersensitivity reported by patients with shoulder pathologies, and to identify patients at risk of joint metal hypersensitivity based on a dedicated questionnaire.

METHODS

The authors prospectively asked all adult patients consulting for shoulder pathologies between September 2018 and February 2019 at 10 centers to fill in a form. The main outcome was "reported hypersensitivity to metals," comprising belt buckles, coins, earrings, fancy jewelry, keys, leather, metallic buttons, piercings, spectacles, watch bracelets, or zips.

RESULTS

A total of 3217 patients agreed to fill in the survey, aged 55 ± 16 (range, 18-101) with equal proportions of men (51%) and women (49%), and a majority of patients consulting for cuff pathology (55%). A total of 891 (28%) patients had professions considered at risk for metal hypersensitivity. The most frequently reported metal hypersensitivities were fancy jewelry (15%), earrings (13%), and watch bracelets (9%). A total of 629 (20%) patients, of which the vast majority were women, reported hypersensitivity to 1 or more metals.

CONCLUSIONS

This survey of 3217 patients identified 20% who reported metal hypersensitivities, though only 2.2% had done patch tests. Matching profiles of those with positive patch tests to those with no patch tests revealed that 9.4% of the total cohort had similar sex and self-reported metal hypersensitivities. Factors associated with a positive patch test were female sex, self-reported cutaneous allergy, and self-reported metal hypersensitivity. The clinical applicability of these estimates remains uncertain as there is insufficient evidence that allergy to metal implants can be predicted by questionnaires or patch tests.

Postmortem Retrieval Analysis of Metallosis and Periprosthetic Tissue Metal Concentrations in Total Knee Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to determine the preferred sampling location for tissue analysis in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and to evaluate metal concentrations, inflammatory cytokines, component damage, and tissue metallosis.

METHODS

Twenty TKA systems were collected at necropsy along with tissue samples from 5 distinct locations. Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) analysis was performed to determine cobalt (Co), chromium (Cr), and titanium (Ti) concentrations. Synovial fluid cytokine analysis was preformed using a Magnetic Luminex Screening Assay. Femoral components were assesed for damage and tissues were visually scored for metallosis.

RESULTS

The median metal concentrations were 16 ppb for Co, 46 ppb for Cr, and 9.8 ppb for Ti. There was no association between the tissue collection site and the metal concentration for Co (P = .979), Cr (P = .712), or Ti (P = .854). Twelve of 20 of the necropsy-retrieved TKAs had metallosis, but there was no correlation between Co (P = .48), Cr (P = .89), or Ti (P = .60) concentration and metallosis. Increased Co was associated with decreased tumor necrosis factor alpha (ρ = -0.56, P = .01) and interleukin 1 beta (ρ = -0.48, P = .03). Increased Cr was associated with decreased tumor necrosis factor alpha (ρ= -0.47, P = .03), interleukin 6 (ρ= -0.43, P = .04), and macrophage inflammatory protein 3 alpha (ρ= -0.47, P = .03).

CONCLUSION

We observed elevated Co, Cr, and Ti concentrations in tissue from necropsy-retrieved TKA. Our findings did not support the hypothesis that tissue metal concentrations were associated with inflammatory cytokines. The results of this research will be useful for the design of future prospective studies.

Increased risk of eczema after joint replacement: A population-based retrospective cohort study

There are very few reports of eczema and other prosthetic-related allergic skin complications following arthroplasty. We aimed to assess the risk of eczema after joint replacement.We performed a retrospective population-based cohort study in 2024 joint replacement patients using the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database. For comparison, 8096 controls were selected, with 4 control subjects for each joint replacement patient matched for age, sex, and index year, to assess eczema risk. We examined 14-year cumulative eczema incidence associated with age, sex, immunity, disease history, and joint replacement location.Eczema rates in the joint replacement patients were 38% higher than in the control group (57.90 vs 41.84 per 1000 person-years, respectively). Compared with the control group, joint replacement patients showed a 1.35-fold increased risk of eczema according to the multivariable Cox model (95% Confidence interval [CI] = 1.23-1.49). Knee replacement patients had higher eczema risk compared with the control group (Hazard ratio [HR] = 1.45, 95% CI = 1.33-1.70). Stratified by study period, the joint replacement cohort had a higher eczema risk after the 3-month follow-up.Our study revealed that joint arthroplasty increased risk of eczema in this 14-year follow-up study, and this was not related to personal atopic history or gender.

Utility of Patch Testing and Lymphocyte Transformation Testing in the Evaluation of Metal Allergy in Patients with Orthopedic Implants

Total joint arthroplasties are increasingly common orthopedic procedures performed throughout the United States. Implant failure after these procedures occurs due to a number of causes such as infection or mechanical problems, with metal hypersensitivity being an area of growing interest. The nature and mechanism of a causative relationship between metal hypersensitivity and implant failure have been unclear as it is not known whether implant failure occurs due to a previous metal allergy or metal allergy results from secondary sensitization via metal exposure in existing failing implants. Overall, there appears to be growing support and evidence for metal-hypersensitive patients having worse outcomes with regard to total hip and knee arthroplasties. However, there are conflicting recommendations (outside of Nuss procedures) for pre-implant testing for metal hypersensitivity as testing has not consistently been shown to change patient outcomes.

The Allergic Bone Marrow? The Immuno-Capacity of the Human Bone Marrow in Context of Metal-Associated Hypersensitivity Reactions

Arthroplasty ranks among the greatest achievements of surgical medicine, with total hip replacement termed “the operation of the century.” Despite its wide success, arthroplasty bears risks, such as local reactions to implant derived wear and corrosion products. Prevalence of allergies across Western society increases and along the number of reported hypersensitivity reactions to orthopedic implant materials. In this context the main focus is on delayed hypersensitivity (DTH). This mechanism is mainly attributed to T cells and an overreaction of the adaptive immune system. Arthroplasty implant materials are in direct contact with bone marrow (BM), which is discussed as a secondary lymphoid organ. However, the mechanisms of sensitization toward implant wear remain elusive. Nickel and cobalt ions can form haptens with native peptides to activate immune cell receptors and are therefore common T helper allergens in cutaneous DTH. The rising prevalence of metal-related allergy in the general population and evidence for the immune-modulating function of BM allow for the assumption hypersensitivity reactions could occur in peri-implant BM. There is evidence that pro-inflammatory factors released during DTH reactions enhance osteoclast activity and inhibit osteoblast function, an imbalance characteristic for osteolysis. Even though some mechanisms are understood, hypersensitivity has remained a diagnosis of exclusion. This review aims to summarize current views on the pathomechanism of DTH in arthroplasty with emphasis on BM and discusses recent advances and future directions for basic research and clinical diagnostics.

Improved outcomes in patients with positive metal sensitivity following revision total knee arthroplasty

Background

Metal sensitivity as a cause for painful joint replacement has become increasingly prevalent; however, there is a lack of reported clinical outcome data from total knee arthroplasty patients with metal allergies. The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients presenting with a painful total knee arthroplasty with a positive metal sensitivity have improved outcomes following revision to a hypoallergenic implant.

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted for patients that underwent a revision total knee arthroplasty after metal sensitivity testing over a 3-year period from January 1, 2015, to December 31, 2017. Based on the results of sensitivity testing, patients underwent revision total knee arthroplasty to a hypoallergenic component or a standard component. Following revision, patients returned to the clinic at an interval of 6 weeks, 5 months, and 12 months for functional, pain, and satisfaction assessment. Outcomes were compared within and between sensitivity groups.

Results

Of the included patients, 78.3% (39/46) were positive for metal sensitivity. The most common metal sensitivity was to nickel (79.5%, 32/39). Both non-reactive and reactive patients significantly improved in range of motion after revision arthroplasty. The reactive group saw a 37.8% decrease in pain at 6 weeks post-revision (p < 0.001) Whereas, the non-reactive group only saw a moderate, non-significant improvement in pain reduction at 6 weeks post-revision (27.0%; p = 0.29). Frequency of pain experienced did not vary significantly between groups. Maximum metal lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) sensitivity score did not correlate with pain level at the time of revision (R² = 0.02, p = 0.38) or percent improvement after revision (R² = 0.001, p = 0.81). Overall, all patients reported being very satisfied after revision total knee arthroplasty; there was no difference between positive and negative sensitivity groups (W = 62, p = 0.89).

Conclusions

Patients presenting with a painful knee arthroplasty and positive metal LTT have improved pain scores, walking function, and range of motion following revision to a hypoallergenic component. This study also provides a treatment algorithm for patients presenting with a painful knee replacement, in order to provide effective and timely diagnosis and management.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13018-019-1228-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prevalence of metal hypersensitivity in total knee replacement

Background

Cutaneous and local reactions to metals used in orthopaedic implants have been well documented. The prevalence of metal sensitivity in general population is 10%-15%. Nickel, Cobalt and Chromium are the most common allergen. The association between cutaneous reactions and implants has been less understood. Hence, this study was taken up with the aim to assess the prevalence of metal hypersensitivity in Total Knee Replacement (TKR) patients and find the most prevalent allergen.

Materials & methods

Longitudinal study conducted during January-December 2017. We enrolled 233 subjects who were at least three months postoperative. Radiological assessment was done. CREDISOL® kit was used for patch test. Results were recorded using ICDRG grading at 48 hours and five days.

Results

Mean age was 59.59 years; 12.01% were symptomatic. Pain followed by loss of function were the most common symptoms. However, loss of function and patient dissatisfaction towards procedure were significantly associated with metal hypersensitivity (χ² value > 3.84; p value < 0.05). In 66% subjects, pre-operative diagnosis was severe osteoarthritis, followed by rheumatoid arthritis (23%). None of the subjects had evidence of loosening on X-ray. Prevalence of Metal Hypersensitivity was found to be 15.87% (patch test positive). Chromium (11.58%) was found to be most common allergen followed by Nickel (8.58%) and then Cobalt (6.43%).

Conclusions

Significant prevalence of metal hypersensitivity was found. Therefore, we recommend pre-operative patch test for detecting allergic reactions to implants. Alternatives like Titanium or Zirconium can be used to avoid complications.

Similar outcome during short-term follow-up after coated and uncoated total knee arthroplasty: a randomized controlled study

PURPOSE

Patients with known hypersensitivity to metals often require hypoallergenic TKA implants. Coating of a standard implant is a common solution, and although in vitro tests have demonstrated reduction of polyethylene wear for these coatings, it is still unknown whether these implants have any clinical benefit. This study was initiated to investigate metal ion concentrations, knee function and patient-reported outcome (PRO) after coated and uncoated TKA.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-two (122) patients were randomized to receive a coated or a standard TKA and, after exclusions, 59 patients were included in each group. Knee function and PRO were assessed with validated scores up to 3 years after surgery. Metal ion concentrations in blood samples were determined for chromium, cobalt, molybdenum and nickel, preoperatively and 1 year after surgery.

RESULTS

Chromium concentrations in patient plasma increased from a median of 0.25 to 1.30 µg/l in the standard TKA group, and from 0.25 to 0.75 µg/l in the coated TKA group (p = 0.012). Thirteen patients (3 coated, 10 standard TKA) had chromium concentrations above 2 µg/l. The concentrations of cobalt, molybdenum and nickel did not change. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) demonstrated a substantial improvement after TKA, without any differences between the groups.

CONCLUSION

The increase in chromium concentration in the standard group needs further investigation. If surgeons use coated implants, they can be confident that these implants perform as well as standard implants.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

I.

Metal allergy in total-joint arthroplasty: Case report and literature review

RATIONALE

Due to the low incidence and lack of effective diagnostic measures for the diagnosis of metal allergy in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA), diagnosis relies mainly on the exclusion of other causes, in particular infection. It remains a relatively unpredictable and poorly understood cause of implant failure. At present, skin patch testing, leukocyte migration inhibition test (LMIT) and lymphocyte transformation tests (LTT) are being commonly used to assess metal hypersensitivity.This report presents both a case and literature review.

PATIENT CONCERNS

A 61-year-old female patient experienced continuous swelling and pain in the right knee joint for 9 months after a right-side total knee arthroplasty (TKA).

DIAGNOSES

We believe this is the case report of metal allergy in TKA. The following were the reasons for this. First, no definite symptoms of infection during revision arthroplasty were observed, but with obvious hyperplasia of synovium. Furthermore, a frozen biopsy revealed an extremely low neutrophil count, which was considered to be caused by chronic inflammation. Second, the results of repeated post-operation reexaminations indicate a clear increase in the number of eosinophils, while no bacteria were found in the tissue bacterial smear performed during the operation. Third, improvements were clearly observed in the patient following synovectomy, revision of the polyethylene insert and anti-anaphylactic treatment.

INTERVENTIONS

The patient underwent synovectomy, revision of the polyethylene insert and anti-anaphylactic treatment.

OUTCOMES

The patient's right knee remained mildly swollen; however, the pain has been relieved significantly. The range of motion could achieve 0 degrees of extension and 90 degrees of flexion.

LESSONS

No consensus has been reached about the best diagnostic criteria for this disease, and most physicians would consider it to be a possibility when other diseases including periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) have been excluded. Although this case followed the same course, the outcome following synovectomy and anti-anaphylactic treatment further confirmed our hypothesis.

What role does metal allergy sensitization play in total knee arthroplasty revision?

Background

Clinicians are often faced with the decision whether to revise a painful total knee replacement in patients who have chronic vague pain with no apparent explanation. A sensitive metal testing assay called the lymphocyte stimulation test has been used to detect nickel sensitization in patients with orthopedic implants. We hypothesize that nickel sensitization plays a role in the pathology of failed joint arthroplasty in patients with unexplained dissatisfaction.

Methods

32 patients with symptomatic total knee arthroplasty without obvious mechanical findings were tested prior to revision surgery. 19 nickel-sensitized and 13 non-sensitized patients were compared by cell counts of synovium surgical specimens for CD4⁺ and CD8⁺ cell lines. Patients were then revised with ceramic-coated implants. Secondary evaluation of functional outcomes, range of motion, and pain relief were assessed.

Results

Nickel-sensitive patients showed a statistical increase in CD4⁺ reactivity compared to CD8⁺ reactivity. The ratio of CD4⁺/CD8⁺ T lymphocytes was 1.28 in nickel-sensitive patients versus 0.76 in the control (p = 0.009). There was no difference in functional scores, clinical scores, or range of motion after revision.

Conclusions

This study provides objective data via histological analysis in support of a nickel allergic sensitization in failed arthroplasties where clinical and/or radiographic abnormalities may not be apparent. Biopsy for CD4⁺/CD8⁺ cell counts may provide further proof of the existence of nickel sensitization in lymphocyte stimulation test positive patients, and more importantly, may implore the surgeon to consider low nickel implant design in these patients.

Metal hypersensitivity in patients with orthopaedic implant complications-A retrospective clinical study

BACKGROUND

Hypersensitivity to metals as a cause of implant-related complications has been a subject of controversy. Projections indicate an increase in the frequency of joint replacements of between 300% and 600% by the year 2030; therefore, this issue is of considerable interest.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate sensitization to implant materials in patients with implant-related complications, to identify allergens, and to clarify whether hypersensitivity is a relevant cause.

METHODS

Patients with implant-related complications or a positive history of contact allergy and planned total joint replacements referred for allergological investigation between 2004 and 2017 were retrospectively analysed.

RESULTS

In total, 311 patients were included. A positive patch test reaction to a metal was seen in 64.4% of preoperative patients and in 54.6% of patients with implant-related complications. Common alloy metals such as cobalt, chromium and titanium gave positive reactions in up to 2.9% of patients with implant-related complications. None of the patients with skin changes had a positive patch test reaction to an implant metal.

CONCLUSION

Other factors, such as the type of replaced joint and mechanical stress, seem to be more relevant for implant-related complications. Sensitization to metals or other materials seems to rarely play a role, and is overestimated.

Vanadium allergy following total knee arthroplasty

Allergic reactions to metals following joint arthroplasty represent a rare and poorly understood phenomenon. Much is still unknown regarding the natural history of this complication, and how it can best be prevented and managed. We present a case of a 68-year-old woman who underwent a left total knee arthroplasty for treatment of osteoarthritis. After an initial uneventful postoperative course, she developed a troublesome erythematous rash both around the incision site and over her trunk. Blood testing revealed no evidence of infection and clinically her prosthesis was functioning well. Skin patch testing revealed positive results for vanadium (+) and palladium (+). Her cutaneous symptoms are currently being managed conservatively and have shown a partial response to topical steroids. Revision surgery remains a long-term treatment option should conservative therapy fail; however, it would require a custom-made prosthesis as no standard tibial component is free from vanadium.

Metal hypersensitivity in total hip and knee arthroplasty: Current concepts

Metal hypersensitivity (MHS) is a rare complication of total joint arthroplasty that has been linked to prosthetic device failure when other potential causes have been ruled out. The purpose of this review was to conduct an analysis of existing literature in order to get a better understanding of the pathophysiology, presentation, diagnosis, and management of MHS. It has been described as a type IV hypersensitivity reaction to the metals comprising prosthetic implants, often nickel and cobalt-chromium. Patients suffering from this condition have reported periprosthetic joint pain and swelling as well as cutaneous, eczematous dermatitis. There is no standard for diagnosis MHS, but tests such as patch testing and lymphocyte transformation testing have demonstrated utility, among others. Treatment options that have demonstrated success include administration of steroids and revision surgery, in which the existing metal implant is replaced with one of less allergenic materials. Moreover, the definitive resolution of symptoms has most commonly required revision surgery with the use of different implants. However, more studies are needed in order to understand the complexity of this subject.

[Adverse reactions to metal orthopedic implants after knee arthroplasty]

Based on several clinical examples, the range of adverse or hypersensitive reactions to metal implants especially after total knee replacement are presented. In general, we found the patients to generally be women who present with pain, swelling, and local or generalized eczema. Some also present with early aseptic loosening mainly in the first 4 years after implantation. For these patients, a detailed allergy-specific history should be taken and a patch test should be performed; if necessary, blood ion levels should be evaluated to exclude cobaltism. Before revision surgery and exchange of the implant we always perform arthroscopic inspection to obtain biopsies for microbiology and histopathology. Using the Consensus Classification a good evaluation for planning revision with the different implant options is possible.

Metal Hypersensitivity Reactions to Orthopedic Implants

Total hip and knee replacement surgery using metal alloy devices is common. Type IV allergic reactions to these implants occur, though infrequently. While uncommon, peri-implant metal allergic reactions may cause significant morbidity for the affected individual-including aseptic loosening, pseudotumor formation and frank device failure. It is challenging to predict who will have these reactions, even in those with established pre-implant metal allergy. At this time, the scientific literature clearly supports few conclusions. Despite this, we believe several conclusions can be made: routine pre-implant testing in asymptomatic individuals is not indicated; listen to patient's concerns about metal allergy if the concern arises; patch testing is probably the best pre- and post-implant screening test; post-implantation testing is controversial and even positive LTT or patch test does not definitively diagnose morbidity from a metal allergy; and complete recovery following revision placement of an immunologically inert device is diagnostic. More research is needed to scientifically approach this issue.

Allergy in Total Knee Replacement. Does It Exist?: Review Article

BACKGROUND

There is little data on whether preexisting allergies to implant materials and bone cement have an impact on the outcome of TKA.

QUESTIONS/PURPOSES

This review article analyzes the current literature to evaluate the prevalence and importance of metal and cement allergies for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.

METHODS

A review of the literature was performed using the following search criteria: "knee," "arthroplasty," and "allergy" as well as "knee," "arthroplasty," and "hypersensitivity."

RESULTS

One hundred sixteen articles were identified on PubMed, Seventy articles could be excluded by reviewing the title and abstract leaving 46 articles to be included for this review. The majority of the studies cited patch testing as the gold standard for screening and diagnosis of hypersensitivity following TKA. There is consensus that patients with self-reported allergies against metals or bone cement and positive patch test should be treated with hypoallergenic materials or cementless TKA. Treatment options include the following: coated titanium or cobalt-chromium implants, ceramic, or zirconium oxide implants.

CONCLUSION

Allergies against implant materials and bone cement are rare. Patch testing is recommended for patients with self-reported allergies. The use of special implants is recommended for patients with a confirmed allergy.

Revision total knee arthroplasty due to bone cement and metal hypersensitivity

INTRODUCTION

Hypersensitivity to implants is a rare complication of total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Metal and, less frequently, bone cement can produce allergic symptomatology that if unresponsive to conservative treatment could lead to revision.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We present the case of a patient with generalized pruritus and metal taste starting during the first postoperative month after TKA. Dermal allergy exams revealed that the patient had hypersensitivity to nickel sulphate and cobalt chloride and bone cement. Conservative treatment with antihistamine medication and corticosteroids failed to control the symptoms. The patient underwent revision TKA with a hypoallergic prosthesis 8 months after the primary procedure.

RESULTS

Full disappearance of the symptoms occurred 3 months after revision. The latest follow-up evaluation (3 years post-revision) was unremarkable.

CONCLUSIONS

In our opinion, an exhaustive medical history should be obtained from every candidate for total joint replacement and in cases of prior severe allergic reactions to metals, plastics or glues, patch testing of the components of the future prosthesis should be done. When an already implanted prosthesis causes symptoms like pain, edema, pruritus, erythema, limited range of motion and increase in joint's temperature, the possibility of allergy to metals and/or bone cement (in case of cemented prosthesis) should be checked after the exclusion of other reasons like infection. If symptoms cannot be controlled by conservative measures, revision should be decided and carried out with hypoallergic prosthesis.

Hypersensitivity reactions to metal implants: laboratory options

Background

All implant compounds undergo an electrochemical process when in contact with biological fluids, as well as mechanical corrosion due to abrasive wear, with production of metal debris that may inhibit repair processes. None of the commonly-used methods can diagnose implant allergies when used singly, therefore a panel of tests should be performed on allergic patients as pre-operative screening, or when a postoperative metal sensitisation is suspected.

Methods

We analysed patients with painful prostheses and subjects prone to allergies using the Patch Test in comparison with the Lymphocyte Transformation Test. Cytokine production was evaluated to identify prognostic markers for early diagnosis of aseptic loosening. Metal debris endocytosis and cytoskeletal rearrangement was visualised by confocal microscopy.

Results

Our results demonstrate that the Lymphocyte Transformation Test can identify patients who have a predisposition to develop allergic reactions and can confirm the diagnosis of hypersensitivity in patients with painful prostheses.

The prevalence of a Th2-cytokine pattern may be used to identify predisposition to the development of allergic diseases, while the selective presence of osteoclastogenic cytokines may be used as predictor of a negative outcome in patients with painful prosthesis.

The hypothesis of the prognostic value of these cytokines as early markers of aseptic loosening is attractive, but its confirmation would require extensive testing.

Conclusions

The Lymphocyte Transformation Test is the most suitable method for testing systemic allergies. We suggest that the combined use of the Patch Test and the Lymphocyte Transformation Test, associated with cytokine detection in selected patients, could provide a useful tool for preventive evaluation of immune reactivity in patients undergoing primary joint replacement surgery, and for clinical monitoring of the possible onset of a metal sensitization in patients with implanted devices.

Quantitative in vivo biocompatibility of new ultralow-nickel cobalt-chromium-molybdenum alloys

Nickel (Ni) eluted from metallic biomaterials is widely accepted as a major cause of allergies and inflammation. To improve the safety of cobalt-chromium-molybdenum (Co-Cr-Mo) alloy implants, new ultralow-Ni Co-Cr-Mo alloys with and without zirconium (Zr) have been developed, with Ni contents of less than 0.01%. In the present study, we investigated the biocompatibility of these new alloys in vivo by subcutaneously implanting pure Ni, conventional Co-Cr-Mo, ultralow-Ni Co-Cr-Mo, and ultralow-Ni Co-Cr-Mo with Zr wires into the dorsal sides of mice. After 3 and 7 days, tissues around the wire were excised, and inflammation; the expression of IL-1β, IL-6, and TNF-α; and Ni, Co, Cr, and Mo ion release were analyzed using histological analyses, qRT-PCR, and inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), respectively. Significantly larger amounts of Ni eluted from pure Ni wires than from the other wires, and the degree of inflammation depended on the amount of eluted Ni. Although no significant differences in inflammatory reactions were identified among new alloys and conventional Co-Cr-Mo alloys in histological and qRT-PCR analyses, ICP-MS analysis revealed that Ni ion elution from ultralow-Ni Co-Cr-Mo alloys with and without Zr was significantly lower than from conventional Co-Cr-Mo alloys. Our study, suggests that the present ultralow-Ni Co-Cr-Mo alloys with and without Zr have greater safety and utility than conventional Co-Cr-Mo alloys. © 2016 Orthopaedic Research Society. Published by Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Orthop Res 34:1505-1513, 2016.

Allergy in total knee arthroplasty: a review of the facts

We explored the literature surrounding whether allergy and hypersensitivity has a clinical basis for implant selection in total knee arthroplasty (TKA). In error, the terms hypersensitivity and allergy are often used synonymously. Although a relationship is present, we could not find any evidence of implant failure due to allergy. There is however increasing basic science that suggests a link between loosening and metal ion production. This is not an allergic response but is a potential problem. With a lack of evidence logically there can be no justification to use 'hypoallergenic' implants in patients who have pre-existing skin sensitivity to the metals used in TKA.

Patch Testing for Metal Allergy With Manufacturer-Supplied Materials Before Nuss Bar Insertion

INTRODUCTION

The increasing use of metal implantable devices has raised awareness of nickel allergy. Preoperative patch testing for patients with pectus excavatum (PE) with a known metal allergy or history of atopy is an accepted practice before the Nuss procedure. The Nuss bar manufacturer offers a metal disc for preoperative testing for metal sensitivities. However, the efficacy of this disc is not well understood.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine the sensitivity of the metal disc in detecting nickel allergy compared with that of standard patch testing.

METHODS

Two PE patients were referred for preoperative patch testing with the metal disc to screen for metal allergy before the Nuss procedure. Based on our initial findings, 7 patients without PE scheduled for patch testing for the evaluation of chronic dermatitis were additionally tested with the metal disc if they were found to have risk factors for nickel allergy. All patch testing was performed according to set standards.

CONCLUSIONS

The metal disc may not be adequately sensitive to determine nickel allergy before the Nuss procedure. Patch testing alone with standard formulations of nickel sulfate in petrolatum may be more sensitive in diagnosing nickel allergy.

Immune response in adverse reactions to metal debris following metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The purpose of the present study was to determine whether T cell-mediated type IV hypersensitivity reactions could be a major cause of adverse reaction to metal debris (ARMD) after metal-on-metal total hip arthroplasty (THA).

METHODS

Thirteen patients (1 man and 12 women; mean age 68 years, age range 60 to 83 years) with ARMD underwent revision surgery following metal-on-metal THA (15 hips). Lymphocyte stimulation testing was conducted. Periprosthetic tissue specimens underwent immunohistochemical studies.

RESULTS

Lymphocyte stimulation testing showed that five patients were nickel-sensitive, and one patient was also cobalt-sensitive. Immunohistochemical studies showed that T cells were dominant in five hips, and B cells were dominant in 10 hips. In four of the five patients with a positive lymphocyte stimulation test, the dominant lymphocytes were T cells, suggesting type IV hypersensitivity. The major cause of ARMD was not type IV hypersensitivity in the remaining nine patients.

CONCLUSION

Metal hypersensitivity does not appear to be the dominant biological reaction involved in the occurrence of ARMD.

Midterm Results After Coated and Uncoated TKA: A Randomized Controlled Study

Patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA) who have hypersensitivity to metals usually receive hypoallergenic TKA implants. Coating of a standard implant is a common solution. Although in vitro tests have demonstrated reduction in polyethylene wear for these coatings, it is unknown whether these costly implants have a clinical benefit for patients. One hundred twenty patients undergoing TKA were randomly assigned to receive a novel 7-layer-coating implant or a standard TKA implant. One revision occurred in the standard group, resulting in a calculated 5-year survival of 100% in the coated group and 98.1% in the standard group. The Oxford Knee Score improved substantially in both groups from a mean of 21.6 points preoperatively in the coated group and 21.9 points in the standard group to 39.2 points and 39.2 points, respectively. The current authors observed no adverse effects with the new coating during midterm follow-up. However, longer follow-up time is needed to evaluate possible advantages of this coating. [Orthopedics. 2016; 39(3):S13-S17.].

Contact dermatitis: a practice parameter-update 2015

This parameter was developed by the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters, which represents the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (AAAAI); the American College of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology (ACAAI); and the Joint Council of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. The AAAAI and the ACAAI have jointly accepted responsibility for establishing "Contact Dermatitis: A Practice Parameter-Update 2015." This is a complete and comprehensive document at the current time. The medical environment is changing and not all recommendations will be appropriate or applicable to all patients. Because this document incorporated the efforts of many participants, no single individual, including members serving on the Joint Task Force, are authorized to provide an official AAAAI or ACAAI interpretation of these practice parameters. Any request for information or interpretation of this practice parameter by the AAAAI or ACAAI should be directed to the Executive Offices of the AAAAI, the ACAAI, and the Joint Council of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. These parameters are not designed for use by the pharmaceutical industry in drug development or promotion. Previously published practice parameters of the Joint Task Force on Practice Parameters for Allergy & Immunology are available at http://www.JCAAI.org or http://www.allergyparameters.org.

Metal Hypersensitivity and Total Knee Arthroplasty

Metal hypersensitivity in patients with a total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is a controversial topic. The diagnosis is difficult, given the lack of robust clinical validation of the utility of cutaneous and in vitro testing. Metal hypersensitivity after TKA is quite rare and should be considered after eliminating other causes of pain and swelling, such as low-grade infection, instability, component loosening or malrotation, referred pain, and chronic regional pain syndrome. Anecdotal observations suggest that two clinical presentations of metal hypersensitivity may occur after TKA: dermatitis or a persistent painful synovitis of the knee. Patients may or may not have a history of intolerance to metal jewelry. Laboratory studies, including erythrocyte sedimentation rate, C-reactive protein level, and knee joint aspiration, are usually negative. Cutaneous and in vitro testing have been reported to be positive, but the sensitivity and specificity of such testing has not been defined. Some reports suggest that, if metal hypersensitivity is suspected and nonsurgical measures have failed, then revision to components fabricated of titanium alloy or zirconium coating can be successful in relieving symptoms. Revision should be considered as a last resort, however, and patients should be informed that no evidence-based medicine is available to guide the management of these conditions, particularly for decisions regarding revision. Given the limitations of current testing methods, the widespread screening of patients for metal allergies before TKA is not warranted.

Patellofemoral Joint Replacement and Nickel Allergy: An Unusual Presentation

Metal allergy is an unusual complication of joint replacement that may cause aseptic loosening and necessitate joint revision surgery. We present the case of nickel allergy causing aseptic loosening following patellofemoral joint replacement (PFJR) in a 54-year-old male. Joint revision surgery to a nickel-free total knee replacement was performed with good results. Our literature review shows that there is no evidence to guide the management of metal allergy in PFJR. The evidence from studies of total knee replacement is limited to retrospective case series and case reports and gives contradictory recommendations. The optimal management strategy for metal allergy in PFJR is not clear. We recommend allergy testing in patients with history of metal allergy and use of an allergen-free implant in those with positive tests. As there is no gold standard test to establish metal allergy, the choice of test should be guided by availability and recommendation from the local unit of dermatology and allergy testing. We recommend investigation for metal allergy in patients with implant loosening where other causes have been excluded.