TY - JOUR

T1 - A literature review and expert consensus statement on diagnostics in suspected metal implant allergy

AU - Thomas, P.

AU - Arenberger, P

AU - Bader, R

AU - Bircher, A J

AU - Bruze, M

AU - de Graaf, N

AU - Hartmann, D

AU - Johansen, J D

AU - Jowitz-Heinke, A

AU - Krenn, V

AU - Kurek, M

AU - Odgaard, A.

AU - Rustemeyer, T

AU - Summer, B.

AU - Thyssen, J P

N1 - © 2024 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.

PY - 2024

Y1 - 2024

N2 - BACKGROUND: Although rare, allergic reactions to metal implants represent a diagnostic challenge in view of missing guidelines.OBJECTIVES: To develop an European expert consensus on characteristics of metal allergy reactions and the utility of various diagnostic tools in suspected metal implant allergy.METHODS: A nominal group technique (NGT) was applied to develop consensus statements. Initially an online literature database was created on a secure server to enable a comprehensive information. Twenty-three statements were formulated on potential aspects of metal implant allergy with a focus on diagnostics and grouped into five domains. For the consensus development, the panel of 12 experts initially did refine and reformulate those statements that were ambiguous or had unclear wording. By face-to-face (9/12) or virtual participation (3/12), an anonymous online voting was performed.RESULTS: Consensus (≥80% of agreement) was reached in 20/23 statements. The panel agreed that implant allergy despite being rare should be considered in case of persistent unexplained symptoms. It was, however, recommended to allow adequate time for resolution of symptoms associated with healing and integration of an implant. Obtaining questionnaire-aided standardized medical history and standardized scoring of patient outcomes was also considered an important step by all experts There was broad consensus regarding the utility/performance of patch testing with additional late reading. It was recognized that the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) has to many limitations to be generally recommended. Prior to orthopaedic implant, allergy screening of patients without a history of potential allergy to implant components was not recommended.CONCLUSIONS: Using an expert consensus process, statements concerning allergy diagnostics in suspected metal implant allergy were created. Areas of nonconsensus were identified, stressing uncertainty among the experts around topics such as preoperative testing in assumed allergy, histological correlate of periimplant allergy and in vitro testing, which underscores the need for further research.

AB - BACKGROUND: Although rare, allergic reactions to metal implants represent a diagnostic challenge in view of missing guidelines.OBJECTIVES: To develop an European expert consensus on characteristics of metal allergy reactions and the utility of various diagnostic tools in suspected metal implant allergy.METHODS: A nominal group technique (NGT) was applied to develop consensus statements. Initially an online literature database was created on a secure server to enable a comprehensive information. Twenty-three statements were formulated on potential aspects of metal implant allergy with a focus on diagnostics and grouped into five domains. For the consensus development, the panel of 12 experts initially did refine and reformulate those statements that were ambiguous or had unclear wording. By face-to-face (9/12) or virtual participation (3/12), an anonymous online voting was performed.RESULTS: Consensus (≥80% of agreement) was reached in 20/23 statements. The panel agreed that implant allergy despite being rare should be considered in case of persistent unexplained symptoms. It was, however, recommended to allow adequate time for resolution of symptoms associated with healing and integration of an implant. Obtaining questionnaire-aided standardized medical history and standardized scoring of patient outcomes was also considered an important step by all experts There was broad consensus regarding the utility/performance of patch testing with additional late reading. It was recognized that the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) has to many limitations to be generally recommended. Prior to orthopaedic implant, allergy screening of patients without a history of potential allergy to implant components was not recommended.CONCLUSIONS: Using an expert consensus process, statements concerning allergy diagnostics in suspected metal implant allergy were created. Areas of nonconsensus were identified, stressing uncertainty among the experts around topics such as preoperative testing in assumed allergy, histological correlate of periimplant allergy and in vitro testing, which underscores the need for further research.

U2 - 10.1111/jdv.20026

DO - 10.1111/jdv.20026

M3 - Journal article

C2 - 38606660

JO - Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

JF - Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology

SN - 0926-9959

ER -