Metal implant allergy: A retrospective cohort analysis at a university allergy practice.

IF 2.6 3区 医学 Q2 ALLERGY Allergy and asthma proceedings Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.2500/aap.2024.45.240005
Mark J Taliercio, Rawaa K Alnabulsi, Priya A Uppal, Ian M Shaw, Kristy M Semenza, Muhammad A Pasha
{"title":"Metal implant allergy: A retrospective cohort analysis at a university allergy practice.","authors":"Mark J Taliercio, Rawaa K Alnabulsi, Priya A Uppal, Ian M Shaw, Kristy M Semenza, Muhammad A Pasha","doi":"10.2500/aap.2024.45.240005","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Concern of metal sensitization in pre- and postsurgical evaluation is growing, with the recent guidelines remaining the criterion standard for consideration of patch testing. Information remains scarce on surgical screening in the groups of patients who reported a history of metal sensitivity versus those with no reported history. <b>Objective:</b> The objective of this study was to assess the utility of patch testing in surgical candidates based on reported metal allergy history. The secondary objective was to evaluate the utility and outcomes in postsurgical patch testing. <b>Methods:</b> Nine hundred and thirty-one patient charts of patients with the diagnosis of \"contact dermatitis\" who underwent an evaluation at a single allergy clinic site between January 2013 and December 2022 were identified and reviewed as part of a retrospective chart review study. Patients were included in subgroups based on the time of patch testing and history of reported metal allergy. <b>Results:</b> In all, 67 patients underwent patch testing, 10 (14.9%) of whom were surgical candidates without a history of metal sensitivity, 31 (46.2%) of whom were surgical candidates with a history of metal sensitivity, and 26 (38.8%) of whom were postsurgical patients. Twenty-nine (43.3%) of patients had positive patch testing results, with only one (10%) in the presurgical group, 17 (54.8%) in the presurgical with a history of metal sensitivity, and 11 (42.3%) in the postsurgical group. Zero patients in our cohort without metal sensitivity who were undergoing the Nuss procedure had positive reactions on patch testing, whereas two of four (50%) with reported metal sensitivity who were undergoing the Nuss procedure had positive relevant metal reactions. <b>Conclusion:</b> Ambiguity in the utility of patch testing for surgical decision making remains, despite common utilization. Recent guidelines along with coordination of care among the surgeon, allergist, and patient remains the criterion standard of care.</p>","PeriodicalId":7646,"journal":{"name":"Allergy and asthma proceedings","volume":"45 3","pages":"186-194"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Allergy and asthma proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2500/aap.2024.45.240005","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ALLERGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Concern of metal sensitization in pre- and postsurgical evaluation is growing, with the recent guidelines remaining the criterion standard for consideration of patch testing. Information remains scarce on surgical screening in the groups of patients who reported a history of metal sensitivity versus those with no reported history. Objective: The objective of this study was to assess the utility of patch testing in surgical candidates based on reported metal allergy history. The secondary objective was to evaluate the utility and outcomes in postsurgical patch testing. Methods: Nine hundred and thirty-one patient charts of patients with the diagnosis of "contact dermatitis" who underwent an evaluation at a single allergy clinic site between January 2013 and December 2022 were identified and reviewed as part of a retrospective chart review study. Patients were included in subgroups based on the time of patch testing and history of reported metal allergy. Results: In all, 67 patients underwent patch testing, 10 (14.9%) of whom were surgical candidates without a history of metal sensitivity, 31 (46.2%) of whom were surgical candidates with a history of metal sensitivity, and 26 (38.8%) of whom were postsurgical patients. Twenty-nine (43.3%) of patients had positive patch testing results, with only one (10%) in the presurgical group, 17 (54.8%) in the presurgical with a history of metal sensitivity, and 11 (42.3%) in the postsurgical group. Zero patients in our cohort without metal sensitivity who were undergoing the Nuss procedure had positive reactions on patch testing, whereas two of four (50%) with reported metal sensitivity who were undergoing the Nuss procedure had positive relevant metal reactions. Conclusion: Ambiguity in the utility of patch testing for surgical decision making remains, despite common utilization. Recent guidelines along with coordination of care among the surgeon, allergist, and patient remains the criterion standard of care.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
金属植入物过敏:一家大学过敏症诊所的回顾性队列分析。
背景:在手术前和手术后的评估中,对金属过敏的关注与日俱增,最近的指南仍然是考虑进行贴片测试的标准。关于有金属过敏史和无金属过敏史患者的手术筛查信息仍然很少。研究目的本研究的目的是根据报告的金属过敏史评估贴片测试在手术候选者中的实用性。次要目的是评估手术后贴片测试的效用和结果。方法:作为回顾性病历审查研究的一部分,对 2013 年 1 月至 2022 年 12 月期间在一家过敏诊所接受评估的 931 名诊断为 "接触性皮炎 "的患者的病历进行了鉴定和审查。根据贴片测试的时间和报告的金属过敏史将患者纳入亚组。研究结果共有 67 名患者接受了贴片测试,其中 10 人(14.9%)为无金属过敏史的手术候选者,31 人(46.2%)为有金属过敏史的手术候选者,26 人(38.8%)为手术后患者。29例(43.3%)患者的贴片测试结果呈阳性,其中手术前组只有1例(10%),有金属敏感史的手术前组有17例(54.8%),手术后组有11例(42.3%)。在我们的队列中,没有对金属敏感但正在接受努斯手术的患者在贴片测试中出现阳性反应,而在报告对金属敏感但正在接受努斯手术的四名患者中,有两人(50%)出现相关金属阳性反应。结论:尽管贴片测试已被普遍使用,但其对手术决策的作用仍不明确。最新的指南以及外科医生、过敏学家和患者之间的协调护理仍是护理的标准。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
35.70%
发文量
106
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Allergy & Asthma Proceedings is a peer reviewed publication dedicated to distributing timely scientific research regarding advancements in the knowledge and practice of allergy, asthma and immunology. Its primary readership consists of allergists and pulmonologists. The goal of the Proceedings is to publish articles with a predominantly clinical focus which directly impact quality of care for patients with allergic disease and asthma. Featured topics include asthma, rhinitis, sinusitis, food allergies, allergic skin diseases, diagnostic techniques, allergens, and treatment modalities. Published material includes peer-reviewed original research, clinical trials and review articles.
期刊最新文献
Evaluation of a disease-state education program in asthma: Application of the Knowledge-to-Action Framework. Management of hereditary angioedema attacks by patients on long-term prophylaxis versus on-demand therapy only. Appraisal of the evidence linking hereditary α-tryptasemia with mast cell disorders, hypermobility and dysautonomia. Exploring mast cell disorders: Tryptases, hereditary alpha-tryptasemia, and MCAS treatment approaches. Health disparities investigated in a primary care penicillin allergy removal pathway.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1