Concomitant contact allergy to formaldehyde and methacrylic monomers in students of dental medicine and dental patients

Nofer Institute of Occupational Medicine - Tập 27 - Trang 797-807 - 2014
Maya Lyapina1, Maria Dencheva2, Assya Krasteva2, Mariana Tzekova2, Angelina Kisselova-Yaneva2
1Medical Faculty, Department of Hygiene, Medical Ecology and Nutrition, Medical University, Sofia, Bulgaria
2Faculty of Dental Medicine, Department of Oral and Image Diagnostic, Medical University, Sofia, Bulgaria

Tóm tắt

A multitude of acrylic monomers is used in dentistry. Formaldehyde is a ubiquitous chemical agent, which is an ingredient of some dental materials and may be released from methacrylate-based composites. The purpose of the study is to evaluate the incidence and the risk of cross-sensitization to some methacrylic monomers (methylmethacrylate — MMA, triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate — TEGDMA, ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate — EGDMA, 2,2-bis-[4-(2-hydroxy-3-methacrylo-xypropoxy)phenyl]-propane — Bis-GMA, 2-hydroxy-ethyl methacrylate 2-HEMA, and tetrahydrofurfuryl methacrylate) and formaldehyde in students of dentistry, dental professionals and dental patients. A total of 139 participants were included in the study, i.e., occupationally exposed dental professionals, students of the 3rd, 4th and 6th year of dental medicine, and occupationally unexposed dental patients. They were patch-tested with methacrylic monomers and formaldehyde. The results were subjected to statistical analysis (p < 0.05). From the allergic to formaldehyde students of the 3rd and 4th year of dental medicine, 46.2% were also sensitized to MMA. Among the group of patients, the incidence of cross-sensitization to formaldehyde and methacrylic monomers was as follows: to TEGDMA — 20.6%, to ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate — 20.7%, to 2-HEMA — 20.7% and to tetrahydrofurfuryl methacrylate — 24.1%. Contact allergy to MMA was diagnosed among 22.7%, and to TEGDMA — among 27.1% of the students of the 3rd and 4th year of dental medicine. In the group of occupationally unexposed dental patients the prevalence of contact allergy to ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate was 20.7%, to Bis-GMA — 27.6%, to 2-HEMA — 44.9% and to tetrahydrofurfuryl methacrylate — 38.0%. The students of the 3rd and 4th year of dental medicine could be outlined as a group at risk of sensitization to MMA and TEGDMA and of cross-sensitization to MMA and formaldehyde. Probably, due to the ubiquitous occurrence of formaldehyde and the wide use of composite resins and bonding agents containing TEGDMA, ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate, 2-HEMA and tetrahydrofurfuryl methacrylate in dentistry, the group of dental patients could be at risk of cross-sensitization to formaldehyde and some methacrylic monomers.

Tài liệu tham khảo

Keyf FA, Keyf AI. Harmful effects of methylmethacrylate and formaldehyde from acrylic resin denture base materials. Saudi Dent J. 1998;10(1):25–28. Henriks-Eckerman ML, Suuronen K, Jolanki R, Alanko K. Methacrylates in dental restorative materials. Contact Dermatitis. 2004;50(4):233–237. Borak J, Fields C, Andrews LS, Pemberton MA. Methyl methacrylate and respiratory sensitization: A critical review. Crit Rev Toxicol. 2011;41(3):230–268, http://dx.doi.org/10.3109/10408444.2010.532768. Kanerva L, Henriks-Eckerman ML, Estlander T, Jolanki R, Tarvainen K. Occupational allergic contact dermatitis and composition of acrylates in dentin bonding systems. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venerol. 1994;3:157–168, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3083.1994.tb00091.x. Enoch SJ, Roberts DW, Cronin MTD. Electrophilic reaction chemistry of low molecular weight respiratory sensitizers. Chem Res Toxicol. 2009;22:1447–1453, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/tx9001463. Ruyter IF. Release of formaldehyde from denture base polymers. Acta Odontal Scand. 1980;38(1):17–27. Tsuchiya H, Hoshino Y, Kato H, Takagi N. Flow injection analysis of formaldehyde leached from denture-base acrylic resins. J Dent. 1993;21:240–243, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0300-5712(93)90136-E. Oysaed H, Ruyter IE, Sjøvik Kleven IJ. Release of formaldehyde from dental composites. J Dent Res. 1988;67(10):1289–1294, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00220345880670100901. Kopperud HM, Kleven IS, Wellendorf H. Identification and quantification of leachable substances from polymer-based orthodontic base-plate materials. Eur J Orthod. 2011;33:26–31, http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ejo/cjq020. Mikai M, Fujii H. Quantitative analysis of allergenic ingredients in eluate extracted from used denture base resin. J Oral Rehabil. 2006;33(3):216–220, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2842.2005.01561.x. Hazardous Substances Data Bank. National Library of Medicine [cited 2013 Aug 1]. Available from: http://toxnet.nlm.nih.gov/cgi-bin/sis/htmlgen?HSDB. Hauman CHJ, Love RM. Biocompatibility of dental materials used in contemporary endodontic therapy: A review. Part 2, Root-canal-filling materials. Int Endod J. 2003;36:147–160, http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.2003.00637.x. Cohen BI, Pagnillo MK, Musikant BL, Dentsch AS. Evaluation of the release of formaldehyde for three endodontic filling materials. Oral Health. 1998;88:37–39. Koch MJ. Formaldehyde release from root-canal sealers: Influence of method. Int Endod J. 1999;32:10–16, http://dx.doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2591.1999.00173.x. Chaves CA, Machado AL, Vergani CE, de Souza RF, Giampaolo ET. Cytotoxicity of denture base and hard chairside reline materials: A systematic review. J Prosthet Dent. 2012;107:114–127, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3913(12)60037-7. Gautam R, Singh RD, Sharma VP, Siddhartha R, Chand P, Kumar R. Biocompatibility of polymethylmethacrylate resins used in dentistry. J Biomed Mater Res B Appl Biomater. 2012;100B:1444–1450, http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jbm.b.32673. Reichl FX, Walther UI, Durner J, Kehe K, Hickel R, Kunzelmann KH, et al. Cytotoxicity of dental composite components and mercury compounds in lung cells. Dent Mater. 2001;17:95–101, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0109-5641(00)00029-4. Dietert RR, Luebke RW, editors. Immunotoxicity, immune dysfunction, and chronic disease. New York: Springer; 2011, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-1-61779-812-2. van Landuyt KL, Nawrot T, Geebelen B, de Munck J, Snauwaert J, Yoshihara K, et al. How much do resin-based dental materials release? A meta-analytical approach. Dental Materials. 2011;27(8):723–747, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.dental.2011.05.001. Sasseville D. Acrylates in contact dermatitis. Dermatitis. 2012;23(1):6–16, http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/DER.0b013e31823d1b81. Aalto-Korte K, Alanko K, Kuuliala O, Jolanki R. Methacrylate and acrylate allergy in dental personnel. Contact Dermatitis. 2007;57(5):324–330, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01237.x. Alanko K, Susitaival P, Jolanki R, Kanerva L. Occupational skin diseases among dental nurses. Contact Dermatitis. 2004;50(2):77–82, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2004.00304.x. Goon AT, Isaksson M, Zimerson E, Goh CL, Bruze M. Contact allergy to (meth)acrylates in the dental series in southern Sweden: Simultaneous positive patch test reaction patterns and possible screening allergens. Contact Dermatitis. 2006;55(4):219–226, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2006.00922.x. Jaakkola MS, Leino T, Tammilehto L, Ylöstalo P, Kuosma E, Alanko K. Respiratory effects of exposure to methacrylates among dental assistants. Allergy. 2007;62(6): 648–654, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01379.x. Prasad Hunasehally RY, Hughes TM, Stone NM. Atypical pattern of (meth)acrylate allergic contact dermatitis in dental professionals. Br Dent J. 2012;213(5):223–224, http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/sj.bdj.2012.776. Kieć-Świerczyńska M, Kręcisz B. Allergic contact dermatitis in a dental nurse induced by methacrylates. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2003;16(1):73–74. Tillberg A, Stenberg B, Berglund A. Reactions to resin-based dental materials in patients-type, time to onset, duration, and consequence of the reaction. Contact Dermatitis. 2009;61(6):313–319, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2009.01590.x. Kanerva L. Cross-reactions of multifunctional methacrylates and acrylates. Acta Odontol Scand. 2001;59(5):320–329, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/000163501750541200. Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Lepoittevin JP. In: Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Lepoittevin JP, editors. Contact dermatitis. 5th ed. Berlin: Springer; 2011. p. 773, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-03827-3. Polydorou O, König A, Hellwig E, Kümmerer K. Long-term release of monomers from modern dentalcomposite materials. Eur J Oral Sci. 2009;117:68–75, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0722.2008.00594.x. Seiss M, Langer C, Hickel R, Reichl FX. Quantitative determination of TEGDMA, BHT, and DMABEE in eluates from polymerized resin-based dental restorative materials by use of GC/MS. Arch Toxicol. 2009;83(12):1109–1115, http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00204-009-0470-7. American Dental Association. ADA Positions and statements: Bisphenol A and dental materials [cited 2008 Nov 20]. Available from: http://www.west-end-dental.com/images/ADABisphenolArticle.pdf. Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development Screening Information Datasets (OECD SIDS). 2-Hydroxyethyl methacrylate [cited 2013 Aug 1]. Available from: http://www.inchem.org/documents/sids/sids/868779.pdf. Ruyter IE. Physical and chemical aspects related to substances released from polymeric materials in aqueous environment. Adv Dent Res. 1995;9(4):344–347, http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/08959374950090040101.