Contact sensitization to iron: A potentially underestimated metal allergen and elicitor of complications in patients with metal implants. (8th March 2022)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Oppel, Eva; Kapp, Florian; Böhm, Ann‐Sophie; Pohl, Ralf; Thomas, Peter; Summer, Burkhard
• Is Part Of: Contact dermatitis. Volume 86:Number 6(2022)
• Page Start: 531
• Page End: 538
• Publication Date: 2022-03-08
• Subjects: chromium -- cobalt ‐ delayed type sensitization ‐ allergy -- knee arthroplasty -- metal implant -- metals ‐ iron -- nickel; Contact dermatitis -- Periodicals; 616.51
• DOI: 10.1111/cod.14074
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0105-1873

Abstract

Abstract: Background: Little is known about sensitization to iron (Fe) in private, occupational, and medical settings, particulary implantology. Objectives: To investigate sensitization to metals, particularly to Fe, both in pre‐implant individuals with presumed metal allergy and in patients with suspected metal implant allergy. To further characterize Fe‐sensitized individuals. Methods: Analysis of patch test reactions to an Fe (II) sulfate–containing metal series in 183 consecutive patients (41 pre‐implant, 142 metal implant bearers). Test readings were on day (D)2, D3, and D6. Evaluation of questionnaire‐aided history of metal reactivity patterns and demographics of Fe reactors. Results: Metal reactivity in pre‐implant/implant/total group was: to nickel 39%/30%/32%; to cobalt 17%/15%/15%; and to chromium 7%/13%/11%. Co‐sensitizations cobalt/nickel (19/58) and cobalt/chromium (11/21) were significant at P < .001; co‐sensitizations Fe/nickel (4/10) and chromium/knee arthroplasty (11/73) at P = .03. Ten of 183 (5.5%) reacted to Fe (2 of 41 pre‐implant patients, 8 of 142 implant bearers), with 10 reacting only on D6. Fe reactivity was highest in complicated knee arthroplasty (7/73). Further peculiarities of Fe reactors included frequent isolated Fe reactivity (6/10), occupational metal exposure (7/10), previous (par)enteral Fe substitution (6/10). Conclusions: The 5.5% prevalence of Fe reactions suggests a potentially underestimated role of this metal allergen in general and in implant bearers. The latter also shows a distinct metal sensitization pattern. Abstract : A high number (10 of 183) of Fe‐positive patients was found in a group of pre‐implant and implant patients. Eight of 10 Fe‐positive patients had metal implants. All Fe‐positive patients had at least positive reaction on day (D)6. These patients showed frequent isolated Fe reactivity (6/10), occupational metal exposure (7/10), and previous enteral/parenteral Fe substitution (6/10).