Allergic reactions from tissue adhesives in spine surgery: a sticky situation.

Q1 Medicine Journal of spine surgery Pub Date : 2023-09-22 Epub Date: 2023-08-16 DOI:10.21037/jss-23-82
Ian J Wellington, Christopher L Antonacci, Michael R Mancini, Isaac L Moss
{"title":"Allergic reactions from tissue adhesives in spine surgery: a sticky situation.","authors":"Ian J Wellington, Christopher L Antonacci, Michael R Mancini, Isaac L Moss","doi":"10.21037/jss-23-82","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"J Spine Surg 2023;9(3):233-235 | https://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jss-23-82 The article “Allergic contact dermatitis to Dermabond Prineo after abdominal wound closure for anterior lumbar interbody fusion: case report” by Coppola, Tobin, and Lawrence describes a rarely reported complication of a commonly used surgical tissue adhesive (1). Dermabond (Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA) is a popular skin adhesive for surgical wounds, owing to its ease of use, quick curing time, and antimicrobial properties (2). Additionally, it has shown an excellent safety profile in spine surgery, with a majority of complications that do occur being mild dermatitis reactions (3-5). Coppola et al. discuss a case of a type IV hypersensitivity reaction to Dermabond Prineo following its use for an anterior lumbar interbody fusion incision, and importantly noted that the patient had previously been exposed to tissue adhesives for prior surgical wound closure without issue. While infrequent, similar cases have been reported. A recent article by Zhang et al. discusses a similar pruritic dermatitis reaction following the use of Dermabond Prineo for an anterior cervical surgical wound (6). Similar to Coppola et al., the patient was treated by removal of the adhesive coated mesh followed by topical corticosteroids and oral diphenhydramine. Additionally, they utilized oral corticosteroids and an oral antibiotic regimen with good effect. Two additional cases of similar dermatitis following tissue adhesive applications were reported in a 2014 correspondence in patients previously exposed to Dermabond (7). A dermatologic study by Asai et al. in 2021 investigated rates of allergic contact dermatitis following exposure to Dermabond in 577 patients using patch testing (8). They found 9 patients (1.5% prevalence) who experienced dermatitis from Dermabond, all of whom had prior asymptomatic exposure, with an average time from application to onset of reaction of 34 days. While the literature surrounding these reactions in spine surgery is sparse, it demonstrates effective methods for managing the symptoms following adhesive induced dermatitis. Remaining adhesive should be removed from the skin, antihistamines such as diphenhydramine can be administered, as well as oral or topical corticosteroids. Consideration should be given to the possibility of an increased risk for surgical site infection from application of a topic corticosteroid on a recent surgical wound, and while this has not been previously investigated, prior literature has shown efficacy in the healing of topical corticosteroids for chronic wounds and burn wounds (9,10). One of the biggest considerations for surgeons facing similar reactions to tissue adhesives is differentiation between contact dermatitis and a surgical site infection. While both are likely to present with erythema, contact dermatitis is expected to be more pruritic and may have associated vesicles, while a surgical site infection would be expected to present with more pain, induration, and possible drainage. That being said, both can present in Editorial","PeriodicalId":17131,"journal":{"name":"Journal of spine surgery","volume":"9 3","pages":"233-235"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/c9/7e/jss-09-03-233.PMC10570652.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of spine surgery","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21037/jss-23-82","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

J Spine Surg 2023;9(3):233-235 | https://dx.doi.org/10.21037/jss-23-82 The article “Allergic contact dermatitis to Dermabond Prineo after abdominal wound closure for anterior lumbar interbody fusion: case report” by Coppola, Tobin, and Lawrence describes a rarely reported complication of a commonly used surgical tissue adhesive (1). Dermabond (Ethicon, Somerville, NJ, USA) is a popular skin adhesive for surgical wounds, owing to its ease of use, quick curing time, and antimicrobial properties (2). Additionally, it has shown an excellent safety profile in spine surgery, with a majority of complications that do occur being mild dermatitis reactions (3-5). Coppola et al. discuss a case of a type IV hypersensitivity reaction to Dermabond Prineo following its use for an anterior lumbar interbody fusion incision, and importantly noted that the patient had previously been exposed to tissue adhesives for prior surgical wound closure without issue. While infrequent, similar cases have been reported. A recent article by Zhang et al. discusses a similar pruritic dermatitis reaction following the use of Dermabond Prineo for an anterior cervical surgical wound (6). Similar to Coppola et al., the patient was treated by removal of the adhesive coated mesh followed by topical corticosteroids and oral diphenhydramine. Additionally, they utilized oral corticosteroids and an oral antibiotic regimen with good effect. Two additional cases of similar dermatitis following tissue adhesive applications were reported in a 2014 correspondence in patients previously exposed to Dermabond (7). A dermatologic study by Asai et al. in 2021 investigated rates of allergic contact dermatitis following exposure to Dermabond in 577 patients using patch testing (8). They found 9 patients (1.5% prevalence) who experienced dermatitis from Dermabond, all of whom had prior asymptomatic exposure, with an average time from application to onset of reaction of 34 days. While the literature surrounding these reactions in spine surgery is sparse, it demonstrates effective methods for managing the symptoms following adhesive induced dermatitis. Remaining adhesive should be removed from the skin, antihistamines such as diphenhydramine can be administered, as well as oral or topical corticosteroids. Consideration should be given to the possibility of an increased risk for surgical site infection from application of a topic corticosteroid on a recent surgical wound, and while this has not been previously investigated, prior literature has shown efficacy in the healing of topical corticosteroids for chronic wounds and burn wounds (9,10). One of the biggest considerations for surgeons facing similar reactions to tissue adhesives is differentiation between contact dermatitis and a surgical site infection. While both are likely to present with erythema, contact dermatitis is expected to be more pruritic and may have associated vesicles, while a surgical site infection would be expected to present with more pain, induration, and possible drainage. That being said, both can present in Editorial
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
脊柱手术中组织粘合剂的过敏反应:一种粘性情况。
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
Journal of spine surgery
Journal of spine surgery Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
5.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
24
期刊最新文献
A comparative cadaveric biomechanical study of bilateral FacetFuse® transfacet pedicle screws versus bilateral or unilateral pedicle screw-rod construct. Advancing the design of interspinous fixation devices for improved biomechanical performance: dual vs. single-locking set screw mechanisms and symmetrical vs. asymmetrical plate designs. Best practices guidelines in the postoperative management of patients who underwent cervical and lumbar fusions. Blood loss during three column osteotomies: influence on outcomes and mitigation strategies. Bone graft substitutes used in anterior lumbar interbody fusion: a contemporary systematic review of fusion rates and complications.
×
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