Cargando…
Symptoms of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in orthodontic treatment
AIM: The study aimed to evaluate to which extent self-reported symptomatology, age, and sex are predictors of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in patients in treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances. METHODS: The study analyzed 228 subjects aged 11–45 years (median 18, interquartile ran...
Autores principales: | , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7326753/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32607604 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40510-020-00318-4 |
_version_ | 1783552402863947776 |
---|---|
author | Zigante, Martina Rincic Mlinaric, Marijana Kastelan, Marija Perkovic, Vjera Trinajstic Zrinski, Magda Spalj, Stjepan |
author_facet | Zigante, Martina Rincic Mlinaric, Marijana Kastelan, Marija Perkovic, Vjera Trinajstic Zrinski, Magda Spalj, Stjepan |
author_sort | Zigante, Martina |
collection | PubMed |
description | AIM: The study aimed to evaluate to which extent self-reported symptomatology, age, and sex are predictors of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in patients in treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances. METHODS: The study analyzed 228 subjects aged 11–45 years (median 18, interquartile range 16–22); 68% of them were females, and 52% were adolescents. The allergic sensitization testing included epicutaneous patch test to titanium, titanium dioxide, titanium oxalate, titanium nitride, and nickel sulfate. The questionnaire on symptoms potentially linked to titanium and nickel sensitization was used. RESULTS: Prevalence of the allergic sensitization to titanium in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment was 4% (2% only to titanium without nickel) while to nickel 14% (12% nickel without titanium). Hypersensitivity to both metals at the same time was present in 2% of subjects. Sensitization to nickel was more common in females than in males (17 vs. 8%) and much more common in adults than in adolescents with small effect size (20 vs. 8%; p = 0.013). Sensitization to titanium was more common in females than in males (6 vs. 1%) with no difference in age. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that adult age increases the odds for being sensitized to nickel for 2.4 × (95% CI 1.1–5.6; p = 0.044) while watery eyes for 3.7 × (95% CI 1.2–11.1; p = 0.022). None of the symptoms were significant predictors of titanium sensitization. CONCLUSION: Allergic sensitization to titanium and nickel are not very frequent in orthodontic patients, and self-reported symptomatology is a weak predictor of those sensitizations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7326753 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-73267532020-07-07 Symptoms of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in orthodontic treatment Zigante, Martina Rincic Mlinaric, Marijana Kastelan, Marija Perkovic, Vjera Trinajstic Zrinski, Magda Spalj, Stjepan Prog Orthod Research AIM: The study aimed to evaluate to which extent self-reported symptomatology, age, and sex are predictors of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in patients in treatment with fixed orthodontic appliances. METHODS: The study analyzed 228 subjects aged 11–45 years (median 18, interquartile range 16–22); 68% of them were females, and 52% were adolescents. The allergic sensitization testing included epicutaneous patch test to titanium, titanium dioxide, titanium oxalate, titanium nitride, and nickel sulfate. The questionnaire on symptoms potentially linked to titanium and nickel sensitization was used. RESULTS: Prevalence of the allergic sensitization to titanium in patients undergoing orthodontic treatment was 4% (2% only to titanium without nickel) while to nickel 14% (12% nickel without titanium). Hypersensitivity to both metals at the same time was present in 2% of subjects. Sensitization to nickel was more common in females than in males (17 vs. 8%) and much more common in adults than in adolescents with small effect size (20 vs. 8%; p = 0.013). Sensitization to titanium was more common in females than in males (6 vs. 1%) with no difference in age. Multiple logistic regression analysis revealed that adult age increases the odds for being sensitized to nickel for 2.4 × (95% CI 1.1–5.6; p = 0.044) while watery eyes for 3.7 × (95% CI 1.2–11.1; p = 0.022). None of the symptoms were significant predictors of titanium sensitization. CONCLUSION: Allergic sensitization to titanium and nickel are not very frequent in orthodontic patients, and self-reported symptomatology is a weak predictor of those sensitizations. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-07-01 /pmc/articles/PMC7326753/ /pubmed/32607604 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40510-020-00318-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. |
spellingShingle | Research Zigante, Martina Rincic Mlinaric, Marijana Kastelan, Marija Perkovic, Vjera Trinajstic Zrinski, Magda Spalj, Stjepan Symptoms of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in orthodontic treatment |
title | Symptoms of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in orthodontic treatment |
title_full | Symptoms of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in orthodontic treatment |
title_fullStr | Symptoms of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in orthodontic treatment |
title_full_unstemmed | Symptoms of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in orthodontic treatment |
title_short | Symptoms of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in orthodontic treatment |
title_sort | symptoms of titanium and nickel allergic sensitization in orthodontic treatment |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7326753/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32607604 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40510-020-00318-4 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT zigantemartina symptomsoftitaniumandnickelallergicsensitizationinorthodontictreatment AT rincicmlinaricmarijana symptomsoftitaniumandnickelallergicsensitizationinorthodontictreatment AT kastelanmarija symptomsoftitaniumandnickelallergicsensitizationinorthodontictreatment AT perkovicvjera symptomsoftitaniumandnickelallergicsensitizationinorthodontictreatment AT trinajsticzrinskimagda symptomsoftitaniumandnickelallergicsensitizationinorthodontictreatment AT spaljstjepan symptomsoftitaniumandnickelallergicsensitizationinorthodontictreatment |