RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Recent studies indicate that females demonstrate an increased risk of experiencing adverse local tissue reactions, aseptic loosening, and revision after primary metal-on-metal hip resurfacing arthroplasty compared with males; the underlying biological mechanisms responsible for sex discrepancies in implant failure remain unclear. In addition to anatomical and biomechanical sex differences, there may be inherent immunological disparities that predispose females to more aggressive adaptive immune reactivity to implant debris, i.e., metal sensitivity. METHODS: In this retrospective study, we analyzed sex-associated rates and levels of metal sensitization in 1,038 male and 1,575 female subjects with idiopathic joint pain following total joint arthroplasty (TJA) who were referred for in vitro metal-sensitivity testing. RESULTS: Females demonstrated a significantly higher rate and severity of metal sensitization compared with males. The median lymphocyte stimulation index (SI) among males was 2.8 (mean, 5.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.9 to 6.0) compared with 3.5 (mean, 8.2; 95% CI, 7.4 to 9.0) among females (p < 0.05). Forty-nine percent of females had an SI of ≥4 (reactive) compared with 38% of males, and the implant-related level of pain was also significantly (p < 0.0001) higher among females (mean, 6.8; 95% CI, 6.6 to 6.9) compared with males (mean, 6.1; 95% CI, 6.0 to 6.3). CONCLUSIONS: In a select group of patients who had joint pain following TJA and no evidence of infection and who were referred for metal-sensitivity testing, females exhibited a higher level of pain and demonstrated a higher rate and severity (as measured by lymphocyte SI) of metal sensitization compared with males. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Prognostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Assuntos
Artralgia/etiologia , Prótese de Quadril/efeitos adversos , Hipersensibilidade/etiologia , Prótese do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Próteses Articulares Metal-Metal/efeitos adversos , Metais/efeitos adversos , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Artroplastia de Quadril/efeitos adversos , Artroplastia do Joelho/efeitos adversos , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Medição da Dor , Complicações Pós-Operatórias , Estudos Retrospectivos , Fatores Sexuais , Adulto JovemRESUMO
Metal sensitivity testing is generally the diagnosis method of last resort for aseptic painful implants with elevated inflammatory responses. However, the relationship between implant-related pain and implant-debris-related metal sensitization remains incompletely understood. Although a sensitivity to nickel alone has been used as a general measure of metal allergy, it may lack the specificity to correlate sensitivity to specific implant metals and thus to select a biologically appropriate implant material. In this retrospective study, we report the incidence of pain and nickel sensitivity in patients with total joint arthroplasties (TJAs) referred for metal sensitivity testing (n=2018). We also correlated the degree of nickel hypersensitivity to implant pain levels (none, mild, moderate, and high, using a scale of 0-10) and the incidence of sensitivity to alternative implant metals in highly nickel-reactive subjects. Most patients (>79%) reported pain levels that were moderate to high regardless of implant age, whereas patients with severely painful TJAs had a statistically greater incidence of nickel sensitivity over the short-term post-operative period (≤4 years). Patients with moderate pain scores (4-7) and high pain scores (≥8) also exhibited significantly higher sensitivity to nickel compared to patients with no pain and no implant (controls) (p<0.05). Highly nickel-sensitive subjects (SI>8) also showed incidences of sensitization to alternative materials such as cobalt, chromium, or molybdenum (57%) or aluminum or vanadium alloy (52%). These data suggest that painful TJAs caused by metal sensitivity more likely occur relatively early in the post-operative period (≤4 years). The incidences of sensitivity to alternative implant metals in only a subset of nickel-reactive patients highlights the importance of testing for sensitization to all potential revision implant materials.