Allergy in surface lesions of the oral mucosa

Rickles, Norman H.

doi:10.1016/0030-4220(72)90442-2

Cited by 22 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 21 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Fortunately, allergic responses to resin‐containing materials in patients are relatively rare. Allergic responses to methyl methacrylate in patients were reported by Fisher (1954), Stungis and Fink (1969), Rickles (1972) and Basker, Hunter & Highet (1990). Responses included ‘burning mouth’, bronchospasm that was causally related to material placement and removal, and the development of intra‐oral vesicles and skin rash.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Component release from light‐activated glass ionomer and compomer cements

Hamid

Okamoto

Iwaku

et al. 1998

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this study was to identify and quantify any component released from seven commercially available light-cured or resin-modified glass ionomer and compomer cements. Twenty-one separate cylindrical stainless steel moulds 6 mm in diameter and 1.0 mm deep were filled with one of seven glass ionomer or compomer cements, light activated and then immediately immersed in separate containers of distilled water. Water samples were retrieved over a time period of up to 30 days and retained for analysis. An occlusal cavity 6 mm in diameter was prepared in extracted human third molar teeth with a remaining dentin thickness of 1.6-2.0 mm. A polypropylene chamber was attached to the cemento-enamel junction of each tooth to contain 1 mL of distilled water. Ten teeth were each filled with one of three cements and light activated. Water samples (eluates) were retrieved over a period of time. All samples were analysed by high performance liquid chromatography. Only one component, hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA), was detected in the eluates from both tooth and mould samples. Analysis of diffusion of the HEMA through dentin showed a relatively sustained movement into the pulp space during the first day, with exponential decline thereafter. Our data show that HEMA was released from all of the light activated glass ionomer cements studied and from the compomer, both directly into water and through dentin. This release may be relevant both to the risk of adverse pulpal responses in patients and to the risk of allergy in patients and dental personnel.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Component release from light‐activated glass ionomer and compomer cements

Hamid

Okamoto

Iwaku

et al. 1998

J of Oral Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Allergic responses to methyl methacrylate (MMA) in patients were reported by Fisher (1954), Stungis and Fink (1969), Rickles (1972), and Basker etal. (1990).…”

Section: Indirect Evidence For Releaseallergic Responsesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Bioavailability of Components of Resin-Based Materials Which Are Applied To Teeth

Hume

Gerzina

1996

Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine

148

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chemical components of many materials used in dental practice can move into the local biophase, where they can have beneficial or adverse effects. The strongest indirect evidence that components of resin-based materials used in dentistry can move into the biophase are the many reports of allergic dermatitis in dental personnel. Direct measurement of component release has shown that triethylene glycol dimethacrylate (TEGDMA), hydroxyethyl methacrylate (HEMA), and, in the case of some orthodontic cements, bis-glycidyl methacrylate and benzoyl peroxide can move into an aqueous medium from a range of resin-based materials which are applied to teeth as part of oral care. In the case of resin composite restorations, HEMA and TEGDMA are available in microgram quantities via the salivary surface in the minutes and hours after clinical placement and via dentin and pulp in the hours and days after placement. Fortunately, moderate thickness of dentin protects pulp tissue against local toxicity. There are no data which suggest that systemic toxicity is a risk with any of these materials. There are some case reports of allergic responses to the monomers in patients, but the incidence of such responses appears at present to be much lower than that in dental personnel.

show abstract

“…The eliciting substance is a hapten, an incomplete antigen which, in combination with components of the oral mocosa, may cause a sensitization of tbe host in 6-20 days (26). Apart from the concentration of the substance in question the condition of the contacting tissues, for example if they have been traumatized, is also an important risk factor for sensitization.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hypersensitivity reactions to dental materials in a referred group of patients

Stenman

Bergman

1989

European J Oral Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

– 151 patients referred to the Department of Oral Diagnosis, University of Umeå, for investigation regarding potential side‐effects of dental materials were subjected to epicutaneous testing at a dermatology clinic. Twelve persons in this group had oral mucosal changes. Among the 151 patients 39 women and 7 men had positive skin reactions to one or more of the test substances used. The majority of the positive reactions were related to metals, particularly nickel, but a number of positive reactions to organic test substances were also noted. In many cases the substance which caused the positive skin reaction was also a known constituent of the restorative or prosthetic materials present in the oral cavity of the patient concerned. The clinical relevance of such findings should, however, be evaluated with great caution and this and connected problems are discussed.

show abstract

Allergy in surface lesions of the oral mucosa

Cited by 22 publications

References 21 publications

Component release from light‐activated glass ionomer and compomer cements

Component release from light‐activated glass ionomer and compomer cements

Bioavailability of Components of Resin-Based Materials Which Are Applied To Teeth

Hypersensitivity reactions to dental materials in a referred group of patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About