Intolerance reactions to knee arthroplasty in patients with nickel/cobalt allergy and disappearance of symptoms after revision surgery with titanium-based endoprostheses

Systemic allergic contact dermatitis to palladium, platinum, and titanium: mechanisms, clinical manifestations, prevalence, and therapeutic approaches

Contact dermatitis (CD) is an inflammatory skin disease of eczema that is elicited by chemicals or metal ions that have toxic effects without eliciting a T-cell response (contact elicitation) or by small reactive chemicals that modify proteins and induce innate and adaptive immune responses (contact allergens). The clinical condition is characterized by localized skin rash, pruritus, redness, swelling, and lesions, which are mainly detected by patch tests and lymphocyte stimulation. Heavy metals such as palladium (Pd), platinum (Pt), and titanium (Ti) are ubiquitous in our environment. These heavy metals have shown CD effects as allergic agents. Immunological responses result from the interaction of cytokines and T cells. Occupational metal CD accounts for most cases of work-related cutaneous disorders. In this systematic review, the allergic effects of heavy metals, including Pd, Pt, and Ti, and the mechanisms, clinical manifestations, prevalence, and therapeutic approaches are discussed in detail. Furthermore, the therapeutic approaches introduced to treat CD, including corticosteroids, topical calcineurin inhibitors, systemic immunosuppressive agents, phototherapy, and antihistamines, can be effective in the treatment of these diseases in the future. Ultimately, the insights identified could lead to improved therapeutic and diagnostic pathways.

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.

Panniculitis as a manifestation of metal-associated autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants: a case-based review

Autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA) is associated with a hyperergic response of the immune system. The spectrum of clinical changes in ASIA is extensive and difficult to diagnose. Panniculitis is a heterogeneous group of diseases characterized by lesions of the adipose tissue. Panniculitis may become one of the signs of ASIA progress.To describe the clinical signs and morphological changes in the subcutaneous fat as a manifestation of ASIA, developing after osteosynthesis with metal structures.In this case-based review, were searched for all articles published in PubMed and Scopus databases until March, 2021 using the following keywords "panniculitis", "erythema nodosum", "Weber-Christian Disease", "idiopathic lobular panniculitis", "Autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants", "Shoenfeld's syndrome", "metal allergy" "metal implants", "metal hypersensitivity" and reviewed them. Irrelevant items and duplicates were excluded.We report a case of an adult female patient presenting with a non-healing uninfected surgical wound following implantation of metal osteosynthesis construction and panniculitis developed after surgery. A comprehensive examination of the patient to check for ASIA was conducted. Considering the medical history of exposure to metals, tissue lesions, arthralgia, myalgia, low-grade fever, the disappearance of symptoms on the background of immunosuppressive therapy suggested the diagnosis of ASIA.Report affords clinicians and pathologists additional insight into the clinical and morphological picture of ASIA-associated panniculitis which, if remain unidentified, may cause severe complications. We recommend the removal of constructions with adjuvant activity in patients with suspected ASIA-associated manifestations.

An observational study to determine the sensitizing potential of orthopedic implants

INTRODUCTION

Patients who receive orthopedic implants have been shown to develop sensitivity to its components and there are concerns that this sensitivity might lead to contact dermatitis or implant-related problems like loosening and/or failure. The objective of the study was to determine the sensitizing potential of orthopedic implants.

METHODS

Fifty-four patients undergoing knee, hip, or shoulder replacement surgeries between July 2014 and July 2015 were recruited. Patch tests were performed before the implant surgery with 10 allergens likely to be implicated in metal hypersensitivity. Postimplant patch test was performed 6 months after surgery. A majority of the patch tests were applied on the arms.

RESULTS

Four positive reactions were recorded in the preimplant patch tests - three positive reactions to nickel and one to chromium. Thirty patients made themselves available for the follow-up patch test. The incidence of new contact sensitivity to components of implants was 13.8% (4/29) at 6 months. One patient who had undergone knee replacement developed eczematous lesions around the knee joint after surgery. This patient tested negative to patch test at both the times.

LIMITATIONS

Short follow-up duration and performing patch tests on the arms, a site known to elicit less positive patch test response compared to the back in sensitized individuals, are limitations of the study.

CONCLUSION

There is an increase in the sensitivity to implanted components after 6 months of joint replacement surgery. The incidence of new sensitivity to a component of the implant was 13.8% (4/29). In this context, nickel is a good sensitizer and could sensitize 50% of patients who received a nickel-containing implant.

Autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants-ASIA-related to biomaterials: analysis of 45 cases and comprehensive review of the literature

Systemic autoimmune or granulomatous disorders related to biomaterials of human use have rarely been described. The aim of this study was to report cases of autoimmune/inflammatory syndrome induced by adjuvants (ASIA) related to biomaterial injections and prostheses, mainly silicone, hyaluronic acid, acrylamides and methacrylate compounds in a Spanish patient cohort. This study is a retrospective analysis of clinical, laboratory, histopathological and follow-up data of 45 cases of patients suffering from late-onset, non-infectious inflammatory/autoimmune disorders related to bioimplants. Late onset was defined as 3 months or more post injection. Data were obtained through a further non-systematic but comprehensive review of the literature. Forty-five cases of late-onset adverse reactions related to biomaterial injections or prostheses were reviewed. All cases had systemic complaints that could be categorised as ASIA. In all but four patients, inflammatory features at the implantation site preceded distant or systemic manifestations. Abnormal blood tests were common. Localised inflammatory nodules and panniculitis in 40/45 (88.88%) evolved into a variety of disorders, viz., primary biliary cirrhosis, Sjögren's syndrome, sarcoidosis, human adjuvant disease, vasculitis, inflammatory bowel syndrome and inflammatory polyradiculopathy. Five (11.11%) cases presented primarily with systemic autoimmune disorders. Biomaterials and prostheses can provoke late-onset systemic autoimmune disorders fulfilling ASIA criteria, or present primarily local/regional inflammatory reactions that may eventually evolve into systemic autoimmune and/or granulomatous disorders which fall under ASIA.

Proposed ICDRG Classification of the Clinical Presentation of Contact Allergy

The International Contact Dermatitis Research Group proposes a classification for the clinical presentation of contact allergy. The classification is based primarily on the mode of clinical presentation. The categories are direct exposure/contact dermatitis, mimicking or exacerbation of preexisting eczema, multifactorial dermatitis including allergic contact dermatitis, by proxy, mimicking angioedema, airborne contact dermatitis, photo-induced contact dermatitis, systemic contact dermatitis, noneczematous contact dermatitis, contact urticaria, protein contact dermatitis, respiratory/mucosal symptoms, oral contact dermatitis, erythroderma/exfoliative dermatitis, minor forms of presentation, and extracutaneous manifestations.

Implant allergy

Osteosynthesis materials or artificial joint replacement make part of clinical routine. In case of complaints mostly mechanical causes or infections are found. Metals like nickel, chromium and cobalt or bone cement components like acrylates and gentamicine may however potentially cause intolerance reactions to implants. Correspondingly, eczema, delayed wound/bone healing, recurrent effusion, pain or implant loosening have been described as manifestation of implant allergy. In contrast to the high incidence of cutaneous metal allergy, allergies associated with implants are rare. Diagnosis of metal implant allergy is based on excluding differential diagnoses – in particular infection – and on a combined approach of allergological diagnostics by patch test and histopathology of periimplant tissue. Risk factors for allergic sensitization to implants or triggering periimplant allergic reactions in the case of preexisting cutaneous metal allergy are unknown. Despite the risk of developing complications being unclear, titanium-based osteosynthesis materials are recommended for metal-allergic patients and the use of metal-metal couplings in arthroplasty is rather not recommended for such patients. If a regular, potentially applicable CoCr-polyethylene articulation is preferred, the patient has to be well informed and has to give his written consent.

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.

Allergic reactions in arthroplasty: myth or serious problem?

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine the prevalence of sensitisation to chromium, cobalt, nickel, or a cement component in patients who received endoprosthetic surgery at our institution. Also, we aimed to assess the portion related to allergic reactions in endoprosthetic revisions and to follow-up those patients after allergic reaction related revisions.

METHODS

We selected patients with a pre-operative known sensitisation to chromium, cobalt, nickel, or a cement component for a post-operative allergic reaction. All patients who received revision surgery because of a potential allergic reaction were followed up post revision surgery.

RESULTS

Eight hundred fifty-five patients were pre-operative known to have a sensitisation to chromium, cobalt, nickel, or a cement component. Six hundred eighty-two patients (79.8 %) received a primary arthroplasty, and 173 patients (20.2 %) received a revision surgery. Seventeen patients (2.0 %) were revised because of allergic reactions. Allergic reactions were the cause for approximately 0.2 % of all endoprosthetic revisions and for 9.8 % of revisions in patients with sensitisation to one of the reviewed components. Potential allergens were strictly avoided in the replaced prosthesis. Outcome scores improved post-operatively.

CONCLUSIONS

The allergic patient should be thoroughly informed about potential reactions resulting from implant choice. Our study can serve as risk assessments by quantifying the incidence of allergic reactions due to endoprosthetic treatment.

Biomaterial hypersensitivity: is it real? Supportive evidence and approach considerations for metal allergic patients following total knee arthroplasty

The prospect of biomaterial hypersensitivity developing in response to joint implant materials was first presented more than 30 years ago. Many studies have established probable causation between first-generation metal-on-metal hip implants and hypersensitivity reactions. In a limited patient population, implant failure may ultimately be related to metal hypersensitivity. The examination of hypersensitivity reactions in current-generation metal-on-metal knee implants is comparatively limited. The purpose of this study is to summarize all available literature regarding biomaterial hypersensitivity after total knee arthroplasty, elucidate overall trends about this topic in the current literature, and provide a foundation for clinical approach considerations when biomaterial hypersensitivity is suspected.

Patients with intolerance reactions to total knee replacement: combined assessment of allergy diagnostics, periprosthetic histology, and peri-implant cytokine expression pattern

We performed a combined approach to identify suspected allergy to knee arthroplasty (TKR): patch test (PT), lymphocyte transformation test (LTT), histopathology (overall grading; T- and B-lymphocytes, macrophages, and neutrophils), and semiquantitative Real-time-PCR-based periprosthetic inflammatory mediator analysis (IFNγ, TNFα, IL1-β, IL-2, IL-6, IL-8, IL-10, IL17, and TGFβ). We analyzed 25 TKR patients with yet unexplained complications like pain, effusion, and reduced range of motion. They consisted of 20 patients with proven metal sensitization (11 with PT reactions; 9 with only LTT reactivity). Control specimens were from 5 complicated TKR patients without metal sensitization, 12 OA patients before arthroplasty, and 8 PT patients without arthroplasty. Lymphocytic infiltrates were seen and fibrotic (Type IV membrane) tissue response was most frequent in the metal sensitive patients, for example, in 81% of the PT positive patients. The latter also had marked periprosthetic IFNγ expression. 8/9 patients with revision surgery using Ti-coated/oxinium based implants reported symptom relief. Our findings demonstrate that combining allergy diagnostics with histopathology and periprosthetic cytokine assessment could allow us to design better diagnostic strategies.

Clinical and diagnostic challenges of metal implant allergy using the example of orthopaedic surgical implants: Part 15 of the Series Molecular Allergology

The focus of this review are allergic reactions to orthopaedic-surgical metal implants. The spectrum of metal implant associated potential allergic reactions encompasses eczema, impaired wound and fracture healing, infection-mimicking reactions, effusions, pain and loosening. Nickel, cobalt and chromium seem to be the predominant eliciting allergens. Despite the growing number of respective publications the topic „metal implant allergy“ remains a diagnostic challenge. Initially, differential diagnoses should always be excluded in cooperation with surgery collegues. It is recommended to perform a combined evaluation of medical history, clinical findings, patch testing and histology. The lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) can indicate metal sensitization, but it needs careful interpretation. Allergists can provide a substantial contribution to this interdisciplinary topic.

Systemic contact dermatitis

Systemic contact dermatitis is an inflammatory skin disease that may occur in persons with contact allergy when they are exposed to the hapten orally, transcutaneously, per rectum, intravesically, intravenously, or by inhalation. The most common causes of systemic contact dermatitis are drugs used both topically and systemically. Other causes are ubiquitously occurring haptens, such as the metals nickel, cobalt, gold, and chromate, and aromatic substances such as spices. Avoidance of the offending hapten is the most obvious treatment. For some haptens, such as nickel, diet treatment may be effective. Chelation therapy with disulfiram is another therapeutic option in nickel-allergic patients with systemic contact dermatitis. Hyposensitization therapy has been attempted with some success in systemic contact dermatitis caused by nickel and Parthenium hysterophorus.

Pragmatic approach to the clinical work-up of patients with putative allergic disease to metallic orthopaedic implants before and after surgery

Allergic complications following insertion of metallic orthopaedic implants include allergic dermatitis reactions but also extracutaneous complications. As metal-allergic patients and/or surgeons may ask dermatologists and allergologists for advice prior to planned orthopaedic implant surgery, and as surgeons may refer patients with complications following total joint arthroplasty for diagnostic work-up, there is a continuous need for updated guidelines. This review presents published evidence for patch testing prior to surgery and proposes tentative diagnostic criteria which clinicians can rely on in the work-up of patients with putative allergic complications following surgery. Few studies have investigated whether subjects with metal contact allergy have increased risk of developing complications following orthopaedic implant insertion. Metal allergy might in a minority increase the risk of complications caused by a delayed-type hypersensitivity reaction. At present, we do not know how to identify the subgroups of metal contact allergic patients with a potentially increased risk of complications following insertion of a metal implant. We recommend that clinicians should refrain from routine patch testing prior to surgery unless the patient has already had implant surgery with complications suspected to be allergic or has a history of clinical metal intolerance of sufficient magnitude to be of concern to the patient or a health provider. The clinical work-up of a patient suspected of having an allergic reaction to a metal implant should include patch testing and possibly in vitro testing. We propose diagnostic criteria for allergic dermatitis reactions as well as noneczematous complications caused by metal implants.