Drug hypersensitivity to dental materials (review)

   Relevance. The increasing prevalence of hypersensitivity reactions to dental materials among the population of any age entails the need to understand the diversity of the etiology of this problem in order to prevent allergic manifestations in dental practice.

   Materials and methods. Scientific papers were searched in the search engines PubMed, ScienceDirect, Wiley Online Library, SpringerLink, RusMed, eLibrary.ru by keywords: allergy to dental materials, allergy to metals, hypersensitivity to polymers, allergy to acrylates, allergy to latex. The search depth was 5 years (2020–2025). The source search algorithm followed the principles of PRISMA. 516 foreign and domestic publications were identified. A total of 41 publications from an electronic search in the above databases and 19 articles additionally found using a manual search were included in the analysis.

   Results. Among dental materials, metals and polymers are the most common chemical components that can cause hypersensitivity reactions. Hypersensitivity reactions can manifest as immediate hypersensitivity reactions (type I) to metals, latex and some polymers with clinical manifestations in the form of urticaria, angioedema, bronchospasm and anaphylaxis, or delayed hypersensitivity reactions, more often to metals with symptoms of contact allergic dermatitis. Dental materials with biocompatibility issues include composites, latex gloves, local anesthetics, endodontic materials, casts, and metals. The most common manifestations of allergies in dental patients are cheilitis and perioral dermatitis (25.6 %), burning mouth syndrome (15.7 %), lichenoid reaction (14 %) and orofacial granulomatosis (10.7 %). Common contact allergens were sodium thio-sulfate (14 %), nickel sulfate (13.2 %), mercury (9.9 %), palladium chloride (7.4 %), and 2-hydroxyethylmethacrylate (5.8 %). While dental clinic staff usually have contact dermatitis of the hands. The most common causes of contact allergic dermatitis in dental workers are metals, latex, antimicrobials, formaldehyde, preservatives, and methacrylates.

   Conclusion. To clarify the diagnosis, it is important to find out a detailed allergy-related medical history, clinical examination, and confirmatory tests such as patch tests and MELISA. The latest ELISA research method should be widely implemented in real practice.

1. Ditrichova D., Kapralova S., Tichy M., Ticha V., Dobesova J., Justova E., Eber M., Pirek P. Oral lichenoid lesions and allergy to dental materials. Biomed Pap Med Fac Univ PalackyOlomouc Czech Repub. 2007 Dec; 151 (2): 333–339. doi: 10.5507/bp.2007.057. PMID: 18345274.

2. Fleming C.J., Burden A.D., Forsyth A. The genetics of allergic contact hypersensitivity to nickel. Contact Dermatitis. 1999 Nov; 41 (5): 251–253. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1999.tb06155.x. PMID: 10554057.

3. Karabucak B., Stoopler E.T. Root canal treatment on a patient with zinc oxide allergy: a case report. Int Endod J. 2007 Oct; 40 (10): 800–807. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2591.2007.01275.x. Epub 2007 Jun 28. PMID: 17608675.

4. Saglam A.M., Baysal V., Ceylan A.M. Nickel and cobalt hypersensitivity reaction before and after orthodontic therapy in children. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2004 Nov 15; 5 (4): 79–90. PMID: 15558093.

5. Askar H., Tu Y.K., Paris S., Yeh Y.C., Schwendicke F. Risk of caries adjacent to different restoration materials : Systematic review of in situ studies. J Dent. 2017 Jan; 56: 1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.jdent.2016.09.011. Epub 2016 Sep 30. PMID: 27697582.

6. Nielsen N.H., Menné T. Allergic contact sensitization in an unselected Danish population. The Glostrup Allergy Study, Denmark. Acta Derm Venereol. 1992 Nov; 72 (6): 456–460. Erratum in: Acta Derm Venereol (Stockh) 1993 Oct; 73 (5): 397. PMID: 1362844.

7. Tepedino M., Cattaneo P.M., Niu X., Cornelis M.A. Interradicular sites and cortical bone thickness for miniscrew insertion : A systematic review with meta-analysis. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2020 Dec; 158 (6): 783–798.e20. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2020.05.011. Epub 2020 Oct 16. Erratum in: Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2021 Jun; 159 (6): 711. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2021.04.001. PMID: 33077369.

8. Noble J., Ahing S.I., Karaiskos N.E., Wiltshire W.A. Nickel allergy and orthodontics, a review and report of two cases. Br Dent J. 2008 Mar 22; 204 (6): 297–300. doi: 10.1038/bdj.2008.198. PMID: 18356874.

9. Cieplik F., Hiller K.-A., Schmalz G., Mittermüller P., & Buchalla W. (2021). Non-allergy-related dental and orofacial fin dings in 625 patients reporting on adverse effects from dental materials. Dental Materials, 37 (9): 1402–1415. doi: 10.1016/j.dental.2021.06.012.

10. Khamaysi Z., Bergman R., Weltfriend S. Positive patch test reactions to allergens of the dental series and the relation to the clinical presentations. Contact Dermatitis. 2006 Oct; 55 (4): 216–218. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2006.00905.x. PMID: 16958919.

11. Maletin A., Knežević M.J., Koprivica D.Đ., Veljović T., Puškar T., Milekić B., Ristić I. Dental Resin-Based Luting Materials-Review. Polymers (Basel). 2023 Oct 19; 15 (20): 4156. doi: 10.3390/polym15204156. PMID: 37896400; PMCID: PMC10610675.

12. Kanerva L., Alanko K., Estlander T., et al. Statistics on occupational contact dermatitis from (meth)acrylates in dental personnel. Contact Dermatitis. 2000; 42: 175–176.

13. Fleischmann P. Zur Frage der Gefährlichkeit Kleinster Quecksilbermengen. Dtsch Med Wochenscher. 1928; 54: 304–307.

14. Covington J.S., McBride M.A., Slagle W.F., Disney A.L. Quantization of nickel and beryllium leakage from base metal alloys. J Prosthet Dent. 1989; 54 (1): 127–136.

15. Menne T. Quantitative aspects of nickel dermatitis: sensitization and eliciting threshold concentrations. Sci Total Environ. 1994; 148 (2–3): 275–281.

16. Clayton T.H., Wilkinson S.M., Rawcliffe C., Pollock B., Clark S.M. Allergic contact dermatitis in children: should pattern of dermatitis determine referral? A retrospective study of 500 children tested between 1995 and 2004 in one U.K. centre. Br J Dermatol. 2006; 154 (1): 114–117.

17. Randall R.C. Preformed metal crowns for primary and permanent molar teeth : review of the literature. Pediatr Dent. 2002; 24 (5): 489–500.

18. Di Spirito F., Amato A., Di Palo M.P., Ferraro R., Cannatà D., Galdi M., Sacco E., Amato M. Oral and Extra-Oral Manifestations of Hypersensitivity Reactions in Orthodontics : A Comprehensive Review. J Funct Biomater. 2024 Jun 27; 15 (7): 175. doi: 10.3390/jfb15070175. PMID: 39057297; PMCID: PMC11278158.

19. Velásquez D., Zamberk P., Suárez R., Lázaro P. Allergic Contact Dermatitis to Manganese in a Prosthodontist with Orthodontics. Allergol. Immunopathol. Madr. 2010; 38: 47–48.

20. Di Spirito F., Lo Giudice R., Amato M., Di Palo M.P., D’Ambrosio F., Amato A., Martina S. Inflammatory, Reactive, and Hypersensitivity Lesions Potentially Due to Metal Nanoparticles from Dental Implants and Supported Restorations : An Umbrella Review. Appl. Sci. 2022; 12: 11208.

21. Fleming C.J., Burden A.D., Forsyth A. The Genetics of Allergic Contact Hypersensitivity to Nickel. Contact Dermat. 1999; 41: 251–253.

22. Hosoki M., Bando E., Asaoka K., Takeuchi H., Nishigawa K. Assessment of Allergic Hypersensitivity to Dental Materials. Biomed. Mater. Eng. 2009; 19: 53–61.

23. Pantuzo M.C.G., Zenóbio E.G., Marigo H.D.A., Zenóbio M.A.F. Hypersensitivity to Conventional and to Nickel-Free Orthodontic Brackets. Braz. Oral Res. 2007; 21: 298–302.

24. Vaicelyte A., Janssen C., Le Borgne M., Grosgogeat B. Cobalt–Chromium Dental Alloys: Metal Exposures, Toxicological Risks, CMR Classification, and EU Regulatory Framework. Crystals. 2020; 10: 1151.

25. Kassapidou M., Stenport V.F., Hjalmarsson L., Johansson C.B. Cobalt-chromium alloys in fixed prosthodontics in Sweden. Acta Biomater. Odontol. Scand. 2017; 3: 53–62.

26. Al-Imam H., Benetti A.R., Øzhayat E.B., Pedersen A.M.L., Johansen J.D., Thyssen J.P., Jellesen M.S., Gotfredsen K. Cobalt release and complications resulting from the use of dental prostheses. Contact Dermat. 2016; 75: 377–383.

27. Chen J.K., Thyssen J.P. Metal allergy from dermatitis to implant and device failure. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2018.

28. Suito H., Iwawaki Y., Goto T., Tomotake Y., Ichikawa T. Oral Factors A_ecting Titanium Elution and Corrosion: An In Vitro Study Using Simulated Body Fluid. PLoS ONE 2013; 8: e66052.

29. Olmedo D.G., Paparella M.L., Spielberg M., Brandizzi D., Guglielmotti M.B., Cabrini R.L. Oral Mucosa Tissue Response to Titanium Cover Screws. J. Periodontol. 2012; 83: 973–980.

30. Sicilia A., Cuesta S., Coma G., Arregui I., Guisasola C., Ruiz E., Maestro A. Titanium allergy in dental implant patients: A clinical study on 1500 consecutive patients. Clin. Oral Implant. Res. 2008; 19: 823–835.

31. Egusa H., Ko N., Shimazu T., Yatani H. Suspected association of an allergic reaction with titanium dental implants: A clinical report. J. Prosthet. Dent. 2008; 100: 344–347.

32. Nawaz F., Wall B.M. Drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) syndrome: suspected association with titanium bioprosthesis. Am J Med Sci. 2007; 334 (3): 215–218.

33. Müller K., Valentine-Thon E. Hypersensitivity to titanium: clinical and laboratory [43]evidence. Neuroendocrinol Lett. 2006; 27 (suppl 1): 31–35.

34. Comino-Garayoa R., Cortés-Bretón Brinkmann J., Peláez J., López-Suárez C., Martínez-González J.M., Suárez M.J. Allergies to Titanium Dental Implants: What Do We Really Know about Them? A Scoping Review. Biology (Basel). 2020 Nov 18; 9 (11): 404. doi: 10.3390/biology9110404. PMID: 33217944; PMCID: PMC7698636.

35. Siddiqi A., Payne A.G.T., De Silva R.K., Duncan W. Titanium allergy: Could it a_ect dental implant integration? Clin. OralImplant. Res. 2011; 22: 673–680.

36. Kim K.T., Eo M.Y., Nguyen T.T.H., Kim S.M. General review of titanium toxicity. Int. J. Implant. Dent. 2019; 5: 1–12.

37. Wang Y., Zhang Y., Sculean A., Bosshardt D.D., Miron R.J. Macrophage behavior and interplay with gingival fibroblasts cultured on six commercially available titanium, zirconium, and titanium-zirconium dental implants. Clinical Oral Investigations. 2019; 23 (8): 3219–3227.

38. Sagomonyants K.B., Jarman-Smith M.L., Devine J.N., Aronow M.S., Gronowicz G.A. The invitro response of human osteoblasts to polyetherether ketone (PEEK) substrates compared to commercially pure titanium. Biomaterials. 2008; 29 (11): 1563–1572.

39. Bayne S.C. Beginnings of the dental composite revolution. J Am Dent Assoc. 2013; 144 (8): 880–884. doi: 10.14219/jada.archive.2013.0205.

40. Maletin A., Knežević M.J., Koprivica D.Đ., Veljović T., Puškar T., Milekić B., Ristić I. Dental Resin-Based Luting Materials-Review. Polymers (Basel). 2023 Oct 19; 15 (20): 4156. doi: 10.3390/polym15204156. PMID: 37896400; PMCID: PMC10610675.

41. Van Landuyt K.L., Snauwaert J., De Munck J., et al. Systematic review of the chemical composition of contemporary dental adhesives. Biomaterials. 2007; 28 (26): 3757–3785. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.04.044.

42. Kanerva L., Estlander T., Jolanki R. Allergic contact dermatitis from dental composite resins due to aromatic epoxy acrylates and aliphatic acrylates. Contact Dermatitis. 1989; 20 (3): 201–211. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.1989.tb04657.x.

43. Stoeva I., Kisselova A., Zekova M. Allergic contact stomatitis from bisphenol-A-glycidyldimethacrylate during application of composite restorations. A case report. J IMAB-Ann Proc. 2008; book 2: 45–46.

44. Johns D.A., Hemaraj S., Varoli R.K. Allergic contact stomatitis from bisphenol-a-glycidyldimethacrylate during application of composite restorations: A case report. Indian J Dent Res. 2014; 25 (2): 266–268.

45. Aalto-Korte K., Alanko K., Kuuliala O., et al. Methacrylate and acrylate allergy in dental personnel. Contact Dermatitis. 2007; 57 (5): 324–330. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01237.x.

46. Marquardt W., Seiss M., Hickel R., Reichl F.X. Volatile methacrylates in dental practices. J Adhes Dent. 2009; 11 (2): 101–107.

47. Syed M., Chopra R., Sachdev V. Allergic Reactions to Dental Materials. A Systematic Review. J Clin Diagn Res. 2015 Oct; 9 (10): ZE04-9. doi: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/15640.6589. Epub 2015 Oct 1. PMID: 26557634; PMCID: PMC4625353

48. Kanerva L. Cross-reactions of multifunctional methacrylates and acrylates. ActaOdontolScand. 2001; 59 (5): 320–329. doi: 10.1080/000163501750541200.

49. Silvestre J.F., Albares M.P., Blanes M., Pascual J.C., Pastor N. Allergic contact gingivitis due to eugenol present in a restorative dental material. Contact Dermatitis. 2005; 52 (6): 341

50. Deshpande A., Verma S., Macwan C. Allergic Reaction Associated with the use of Eugenol Containing Dental Cement in a Young Child. Austin J Dent. 2014; 1 (2): 1007.

51. Batchelor J.M., Todd P.M. Allergic contact stomatitis caused by a polyether dental impression material. Contact Dermatitis. 2010; 63 (5): 296–297.

52. Gangemi S., Spagnolo E.V., Cardia G., Minciullo P.L. Fatal anaphylactic shock due to a dental impression material. Int J Prosthodont. 2009; 22 (1): 33–34.

53. Kean T., McNally M. Latex hypersensitivity: a closer look at considerations for dentistry. J Can Dent Assoc. 2009; 75 (4): 279–282.

54. Nainar S.M. Dental management of children with latex allergy. Int J Paediatr Dent. 2001; 11 (5): 322–326.

55. Canfield D.W., Gage T.W. A Guideline to Local Anaesthetic Allergy Testing. Anaesth Prog. 1987; 34 (5): 157–163.

56. Bhole M.V., Manson A.L., Seneviratne S.L., Misbah S.A. IgE-mediated allergy to local anaesthetics: separating fact from perception: a UK perspective. Br J Anaesth. 2012; 108 (6): 903–911.

57. Latorre N., Silvestre J.F., Monteagudo A.F. Allergic Contact Dermatitis Caused by Formaldehyde and Formaldehyde Releasers. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2011; 102 (2): 86–97.

58. De Groot A.C., Flyvholm M.A. Formaldehyde-releasers: relationship to formaldehyde contact allergy. Contact allergy to formal-dehyde and inventory of formaldehyde-releasers. Contact Dermatitis. 2009; 61: 63–85.

59. Tas E., Pletscher M., Bircher A.J. IgE mediated urticaria from formaldehyde in a dental root canal compound. J InvestigAllergol Clin Immunol. 2002; 12 (2): 130–133.

60. Lugović-Mihić L., Ilić I., Budimir J., Pondeljak N., Mravak Stipetić M. Common allergies and allergens in oral and perioral diseases. Acta Clin Croat. 2020 Jun; 59 (2): 318–328. doi: 10.20471/acc.2020.59.02.16. PMID: 33456120; PMCID: PMC7808231.