LinkedInXFacebook
Subscribe
Orthopedics This Week
  • My Feed
  • |Posts
  • |Events
  • |MSK Innovations
  • |Power Rankings
  • |Masterclasses
  • |Technology Awards
  • Press Releases
  • |Advertising
  • |Job Board
  • Spine
  • ◆Joints
  • ◆Upper Extremities
  • ◆Foot & Ankle
  • ◆Sports Medicine
  • ◆Pain Mgmt
  • ◆Trauma
  • ◆Biologics
  • ◆Technology
  • ◆People
  • ◆Company News
  • ◆Legal & Regulatory
Home/Large Joints and Extremities/Is Metal Hypersensitivity Testing Unnecessary?
Large Joints and Extremities

Is Metal Hypersensitivity Testing Unnecessary?

January 10, 2019 2 min read Premium comments

Advertisement

Is Metal Hypersensitivity Testing Unnecessary?
Source: Wikimedia Commons and Tarvo Metspalu
Secondary#totaljoints#hypoallergenicimplants#lymphocytetransformationtest

A new review article has found that the existing literature does not support preoperative metal hypersensivity testing. The article, “Metal Hypersensitivity in Total Joint Arthroplasty,” appears in the December 2018 edition of JBJS Reviews.

Nima Eftekhary, M.D., study co-author and resident at the NYU Langone Department of Orthopaedic Surgery told OTW, “The available literature regarding metal hypersensitivity is sparse. The topic is controversial. In discussing this topic with our colleagues we noted that it was a polarizing one with many different opinions offered. In this context, we decided to look more in-depth at the available literature regarding metal hypersensitivity. Specifically, we reviewed the available literature for workup, differential diagnosis, and treatment options.”

“Perhaps the most important takeaway is that metal hypersensitivity is a topic in which significantly more research is required. Additionally, a painful total joint is most likely painful due to a number of other reasons.”

“We found no good data to support routine preoperative allergy testing or routine use of hypoallergenic implants. In a patient who has been worked up for a painful total knee without a clear etiology for pain, workup for metal hypersensitivity is a reasonable option. However, the best of these tests are expensive and not available at all centers.”

“First, we did not find enough evidence to support preoperative allergy testing, though we did come across interesting retrospective studies that demonstrated an increased revision risk in patients with positive allergy testing.”

“In patients with a history of nickel or metal allergy, hypoallergenic implants can be considered. However, the vast majority of patients with a known metal allergy do not develop a hypersensitivity-related issue with their arthroplasty. Cutaneous skin allergies occur through a different immune mechanism that the intra-articular immune reaction associated with metal hypersensitivity from total joint arthroplasty.”

“In the workup of a painful total joint without evidence of a clear etiology for pain, workup for metal hypersensitivity is reasonable. The most sensitive of the available tests is the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT). In a revision surgery for painful total joint arthroplasty due to metal hypersensitivity, hypoallergenic implants should be used. Ultimately, further research is warranted in this complex and controversial topic.”

“Surgeons at our institution are not routinely obtaining a preoperative workup for allergy nor routinely using hypoallergenic implants on primary total joint arthroplasty. Metal hypersensitivity should be considered in a painful total joint in which more common etiologies for pain have been excluded. Revision for metal hypersensitivity should strongly consider use of hypoallergenic implants if available. Further research is warranted.”

React:

Discussion

14
DS
Dr. Sarah MitchellOrthopedic Surgeon · Mayo Clinic

This is a fascinating development. In my practice we've seen similar outcomes with the revised protocol. The key differentiator seems to be patient selection criteria. Has anyone else noticed the correlation with BMI thresholds?

8
JT
James Thornton, MDSpine Fellow · HSS

Great point. I'd push back slightly on the conclusion, the sample size in the cited study is too small to draw population-level inferences. That said, the directional signal is compelling and worth a larger RCT.

5
RP
R. PatelSports Medicine · Stanford

We implemented a similar approach last year. Early results are promising but we're still gathering 12-month follow-up data. Happy to share our protocol if anyone is interested.

Join the conversation

Orthopedic professionals are discussing this. Sign in and upgrade to read every comment and add your voice.

Subscribe

Get Full Access

Read every OTW article and join member discussions for $24.99/month.

Get Full Access

Advertisement

Advertisement

Advertisement

Orthopedics This Week

The most trusted source in orthopedic industry news since 2005. Covering spine, joints, trauma, biologics, and the business of orthopedics.

A publication of RRY Publications, LLC

LinkedInXFacebook

Categories

  • Spine
  • Joints
  • Upper Extremities
  • Foot & Ankle
  • Sports Medicine
  • Pain Mgmt
  • Trauma
  • Biologics
  • Technology
  • People
  • Company News
  • Legal & Regulatory

Resources

  • Subscribe
  • Community Posts
  • Job Board
  • Press Release Opportunities
  • Power Rankings
  • About OTW
  • Advertise
  • Contact Us

Get Full Access

Unlimited articles, community posts, and Power Rankings.

Get Full Access

Plans start at $24.99/mo · Annual saves 20%

© 2026 Orthopedics This Week · RRY Publications, LLC

Privacy PolicyTerms of ServiceCookie Policy