Assessment of adverse reactions to prosthodontic materials
- 1 May 1990
- journal article
- research article
- Published by Wiley in Journal of Oral Rehabilitation
- Vol. 17 (3) , 279-286
- https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.1990.tb00009.x
Abstract
In 1978 five cases of so-called hypersensitivity reactions to Scutan and two Impregum were reported (Dahl, 1978). The aim of the present study was to assess whether hypersensitivity or cell-mediated immune reactions were associated with the adverse clinical reactions in these patients or in others who had experienced the same reactions. Epicutaneous patch testing and lymphocyte transformation tests were carried out in a total of 13 individuals. The findings were difficult to interpret, because there was no consistent association between skin reactions and cell-mediated immune responses in subjects with suspected allergies. Other possible reasons for the reactions originally recorded were therefore discussed. It was concluded that adverse reactions associated with immune-mediated, delayed type hypersensitivity reactions may be elicited by prosthodontic materials, but other pathogenic mechanisms and aetiological factors responsible for the reactions observed should also be considered.This publication has 8 references indexed in Scilit:
- Allergic contact stomatitis to a dental impression materialJournal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 1986
- ALLERGIC STOMATITIS FROM DENTAL IMPRESSION COMPOUNDS1985
- Contact stomatitis and dermatitis to nickel and palladiumContact Dermatitis, 1984
- A possible allergic response to polyether impression material: a case reportThe Journal of the American Dental Association, 1984
- Temperature threshold levels for heat-induced bone tissue injury: A vital-microscopic study in the rabbitThe Journal of Prosthetic Dentistry, 1983
- Reactions to dental impression materialsContact Dermatitis, 1975
- Hypersensitivity to a dental impression material. A case reportBritish Dental Journal, 1973