The use of palladium (Pd) is increasing in metal objects after the banning of nickel in items in prolonged contact with the skin. The properties of Pd make this metal useful in various industrial fields.
Objective
The aim of the study was to evaluate the prevalence of Pd sensitization in patients who underwent patch tests for suspected allergic contact dermatitis in the Triveneto region from 2013 to 2018.
Methods
A total of 4816 patients with symptoms and/or signs of suspected contact allergic dermatitis were patch tested. Individual characteristics were assessed using a standardized questionnaire.
Results
The overall prevalence of Pd sensitization was 7.6% and 10.8% using PdCl2 1% or 2% petrolatum, respectively, with a higher prevalence in women (odds ratio, 2.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.9–3.7) and in 26- to 55-year-old patients. Monosensitization occurred in 1%–1.5% of the patients tested. Health care workers and technicians were more sensitized to Pd than clerks, but the data did not reach statistical significance.
Conclusions
Palladium sensitization was high, but it was mainly associated with nickel sensitization. A possible occupational role was found for workers with potential contact with Pd-containing objects, but more data are needed to reach statistical significance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ThyssenJP, LinnebergA, MennéT, et al.The epidemiology of contact allergy in the general population—prevalence and main findings. Contact Dermatitis, 2007; 57(5):287–299.
2.
SchnuchA, UterW, GeierJ, et alIVDK StudyGroup. Epidemiology of contact allergy: an estimation of morbidity employing the Clinical Epidemiology and Drug-Utilization Research (CE-DUR) approach. Contact Dermatitis, 2002; 47(1):32–39.
3.
BassoP, MauroM, MianiA, et al.Sensitization to nickel in the Triveneto region: temporal trend after European Union regulations. Contact Dermatitis, 2020; 82(4):247–250.
4.
SilverbergJI, HouA, DeKovenJG, et al.Prevalence and trend of allergen sensitization in patients referred for patch testing with a final diagnosis of psoriasis: North American Contact Dermatitis Group data, 2001–2016. Contact Dermatitis, 2021. doi:.
5.
Commission Directive 2004/96/EC of September 27, 2004 amending Council Directive 76/769/EEC as regards restrictions on the marketing and use of nickel for piercing post assemblies for the purpose of adapting its Annex I to technical progress. Off J Eur Union, 2004. Available at: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2004:301:0051:0052:EN:PDF. Accessed January15, 2020.
6.
SuhonenR, KanervaL. Allergic contact dermatitis caused by palladium on titanium spectacle frames. Contact Dermatitis, 2001; 44(4):257–258.
7.
MelberC, KellerD, Mangelsdorf IInternational Programme on Chemical Safety. Palladium. World Health Organization; 2002. Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/42401. Accessed February4, 2020.
8.
ToddDJ, BurrowsD. Patch testing with pure palladium metal in patients with sensitivity to palladium chloride. Contact Dermatitis, 1992; 26(5):327–331.
9.
FinchTM, PraisL, FouldsIS. Palladium allergy in a British patch test clinic population. Contact Dermatitis, 1999; 41(6):351–352.
10.
KrankeB, AbererW. Multiple sensitivities to metals. Contact Dermatitis, 1996; 34(3):225.
Akasya-HillenbrandE, Ozkaya-BayazitE. Patch test results in 542 patients with suspected contact dermatitis in Turkey. Contact Dermatitis, 2002; 46(1):17–23.
13.
OrionE, MatzH, WolfR. Palladium allergy in an Israeli contact dermatitis clinic. Contact Dermatitis, 2003; 49:216–217.
14.
DavisMD, WangMZ, YianniasJA, et al.Patch testing with a large series of metal allergens: findings from more than 1,000 patients in one decade at Mayo Clinic. Dermatitis, 2011; 22(5):256–271.
HosokiM, BandoE, AsaokaK, et al.Assessment of allergic hypersensitivity to dental materials. Biomed Mater Eng, 2009; 19(1):53–61.
17.
NonakaH, NakadaT, IijimaM, et al.Metal patch test results from 1990–2009. J Dermatol, 2011; 38(3):267–271.
18.
KhamaysiZ, BergmanR, WeltfriendS. Positive patch test reactions to allergens of the dental series and the relation to the clinical presentations. Contact Dermatitis, 2006; 55(4):216–218.
19.
ItohE, FurumuraM, FurueM. Rate of actual metal allergy prior to dental treatment in subjects complaining of possible metal allergy. Asian Pac J Allergy Immunol, 2020; 38(3):186–189.
20.
KitagawaM, MurakamiS, AkashiY, et al.Current status of dental metal allergy in Japan. J Prosthodont Res, 2019; 63(3):309–312.
21.
HeratizadehA, WerfelT, SchubertS, et alIVDK. Contact sensitization in dental technicians with occupational contact dermatitis. Data of the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology (IVDK) 2001–2015. Contact Dermatitis, 2018; 78(4):266–273.
22.
DaenenM, RogiersP, Van de WalleC, et al.Occupational asthma caused by palladium. Eur Respir J, 1999; 13(1):213–216.
23.
RastogiS, PatelKR, SingamV, et al.Associations of nickel co-reactions and metal polysensitization in adults. Dermatitis, 2018; 29(6):316–320.
24.
MoulonC, VollmerJ, WeltzienHU. Characterization of processing requirements and metal cross-reactivities in T cell clones from patients with allergic contact dermatitis to nickel. Eur J Immunol, 1995; 25(12):3308–3315.
25.
PistoorFH, KapsenbergML, BosJD, et al.Cross-reactivity of human nickel-reactive T-lymphocyte clones with copper and palladium. J Invest Dermatol, 1995; 105(1):92–95.
26.
HindsénM, SpirénA, BruzeM. Cross-reactivity between nickel and palladium demonstrated by systemic administration of nickel. Contact Dermatitis, 2005; 53(1):2–8.
27.
BordignonV, PalamaraF, Cordiali-FeiP, et al.Nickel, palladium and rhodium induced IFN-gamma and IL-10 production as assessed by in vitro ELISpot-analysis in contact dermatitis patients. BMC Immunol, 2008; 9:19.
28.
MinangJT, AreströmI, Troye-BlombergM, et al.Nickel, cobalt, chromium, palladium and gold induce a mixed Th1- and Th2-type cytokine response in vitro in subjects with contact allergy to the respective metals. Clin Exp Immunol, 2006; 146(3):417–426.
29.
WahlbergJE, BomanAS. Cross-reactivity to palladium and nickel studied in the guinea pig. Acta Derm Venereol, 1992; 72(2):95–97.
30.
EngfeldtM, TillmanC, HindsénM, et al.Variability in patch test reactivity over time, falsely indicating patch test sensitization, in a patient tested with palladium salts. Contact Dermatitis, 2012; 67(2):109–111.
31.
Larese FilonF, UderzoD, BagnatoE. Sensitization to palladium chloride: a 10-year evaluation. Am J Contact Dermat, 2003; 14(2):78–81.
González-RuizL, Vergara De CasoE, Peña-SánchezR, et al.Delayed hypersensitivity to palladium dichloride: 15-year retrospective study in a skin allergy unit. Contact Dermatitis, 2019; 81(4):249–253.
34.
Bordel-GómezMT, Miranda-RomeroA, Castrodeza-SanzJ. Isolated and concurrent prevalence of sensitization to transition metals in a Spanish population. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol, 2008; 22(12):1452–1457.
35.
Rosholm ComstedtL, DahlinJ, BruzeM, et al.Prevalence of contact allergy to metals: nickel, palladium, and cobalt in Southern Sweden from 1995–2016. Contact Dermatitis, 2020; 82(4):218–226.
36.
CristaudoA, BordignonV, PetrucciF, et al.Release of palladium from biomechanical prostheses in body fluids can induce or support PD-specific IFNgamma T cell responses and the clinical setting of a palladium hypersensitivity. Int J Immunopathol Pharmacol, 2009; 22(3):605–614.
37.
MurisJ, GoossensA, GonçaloM, et al.Sensitization to palladium in Europe. Contact Dermatitis, 2015; 72(1):11–19.
38.
DuarteI, MendonçaRF, KorkesKL, et al.Nickel, chromium and cobalt: the relevant allergens in allergic contact dermatitis. Comparative study between two periods: 1995–2002 and 2003–2015. An Bras Dermatol, 2018; 93:59–62.
39.
LidénC, AnderssonN, JulanderA, et al.Cobalt allergy: suitable test concentration, and concomitant reactivity to nickel and chromium. Contact Dermatitis, 2016; 74:360–367.
40.
DurosaroO, El-AzharyRA. A 10-year retrospective study on palladium sensitivity. Dermatitis, 2009; 20:208–213.
41.
FaurschouA, MennéT, JohansenJD, et al.Metal allergen of the 21st century—a review on exposure, epidemiology and clinical manifestations of palladium allergy. Contact Dermatitis, 2011; 64:185–195.
TamI, YuJ, KoLN, et al.Patch testing with an extended metal allergen series at the Massachusetts General Hospital (2006–2017). Dermatitis, 2020; 31(6):359–366.
44.
KimTW, KimWI, MunJH, et al.Patch testing with dental screening series in oral disease. Ann Dermatol, 2015; 27(4):389–393.
45.
MurisJ, GoossensA, GonçaloM, et al.Sensitization to palladium and nickel in Europe and the relationship with oral disease and dental alloys. Contact Dermatitis, 2015; 72(5):286–296.
