Mercury sensitisation: Review, relevance and a clinical report

British Dental Journal

Volumn 205, Issue 7, 2008, Pages 373-378

  Bains, V K ^a   Loomba, K ^b   Loomba, A ^a   Bains, R ^b  

^a Saraswati Dental College and Hospital   (India)

^b KING GEORGE'S MEDICAL UNIVERSITY   (India)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

DENTAL ALLOY; GLUCOCORTICOID; MERCURY;

ADULT; CASE REPORT; CHEMICALLY INDUCED DISORDER; DELAYED HYPERSENSITIVITY; ECZEMA; FEMALE; HUMAN; IMMUNOLOGICAL MEMORY; LYMPHOCYTE ACTIVATION; PATCH TEST; REVIEW;

DENTAL AMALGAM; ECZEMA; FEMALE; GLUCOCORTICOIDS; HUMANS; HYPERSENSITIVITY, DELAYED; IMMUNOLOGIC MEMORY; LYMPHOCYTE ACTIVATION; MERCURY; PATCH TESTS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 53949110044     PISSN: 00070610     EISSN: 17417503     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/sj.bdj.2008.843     Document Type: Review

References (87)

1. Markely M. In Newman S M. Amalgam alternatives: what can complete? J Am Dent Assoc 1997; 122: 66-71.
2. Djerassi E, Berova N. The possibilities of allergic reactions from silver amalgam restorations. Int Dent J 1969; 19: 481-488.
3. Eley B M. The future of dental amalgam implanted in soft tissues - an experimental study. J Dent Res 1979; 58: 1146-1152.
4. Duxbury A J, Watts D C, Ead R D. Allergy to dental amalgam. Br Dent J 1982; 152: 344.
5. Mandel I R. Amalgam hazards. An assessment of research. J Am Dent Assoc 1991; 122: 62-65.
6. Dodes J E. The amalgam controversy. An evidence-based analysis. J Am Dent Assoc 2001; 132: 348-356.
7. Jones D W. A Scandinavian tragedy. Br Dent J 2008; 204: 233-234.
8. Gamiz-Gracia L, Luque de Castro M D. Determination of mercury in cosmetics by flow injection-cold vapour generation-atomic fluorescence spectrometry with on-line preconcentration. J Anal At Spectrum 1999; 14: 1615-1617.
9. Thomson J, Russell J A. Dermatitis due to mercury following amalgam dental restoration. Br J Dermatol 1970; 82: 292-297.
10. th ed. p 526. Saunders, 2003.
11. Adams R M. Occupational contact dermatitis. p162. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1969.
12. Engelman M A, Falls W. Mercury allergy resulting from amalgam restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1963; 66: 122.
13. McGeorge J R. Mercurial stomatitis. J Am Dent Assoc 1935; 22: 60.
14. Akers L H. Ulcerative stomatitis following the therapeutic use of mercury and bismuth. J Am Dent Assoc 1936; 23: 781.
15. White I R, Smith B G N. Dental amalgam dermatitis. Br Dent J 1984; 156: 259.
16. Stejskal V D M, Forsbeck M, Cederbrant K E, Asteman O. Mercury-specified lymphocytes: an indication of mercury allergy in man. J Clin Immunol 1996; 16: 31-40.
17. Laine J, Kalimo K, Forssell H, Happonen R P. Resolution of lichenoid lesion after replacement of amalgam restoration in patients allergic to mercury compounds. Br J Dermatol 1982; 126: 10-15.
18. White R R, Brandt R L. Development of mercury hypersensitivity among dental students. J Am Dent Assoc 1976; 92: 1204-1207.
19. Eggleston D W. Effect of dental amalgam and nickel alloys on T-lymphocytes: preliminary report. J Prosthet Dent 1984; 51: 617-623.
20. Eley B M. The future of dental amalgam: a review of the literature. Part 6: possible harmful effects of mercury from dental amalgam. Br Dent J 1997; 182: 455-459.
21. Henderson D C, Clfford R, Young D M. Mercury-reactive lymphocytes in peripheral blood are not a marker for dental amalgam associated disease. J Dent 2001; 29: 469-474.
22. Stejskal V. MELISA - an in vitro tool for the study of metal allergy. Toxicol In Vitro 1994; 8: 991-1000.
23. Sterzal I, Prochazkova J, Hrda P, Bartova J et al. Mercury and nickel allergy: risk factors in fatigue and autoimmunity. Neuro Endocrinol Lett 1999; 20: 221-228.
24. Strejskal V D M, Danersund A, Lindvall A, Hudecek R et al. Metal-specific lymphocytes: biomarkers of sensitivity in man. Neuro Endocrinol Lett 1999; 20: 289-298.
25. Ostman P O, Anneroth G, Skoglund A. Amalgam assisted oral lichenoid reactions. Clinical and histologic changes after removal of amalgam fillings. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod 1996; 81: 459-465.
26. Handley J, Todd D, Borrows D. Mercury allergy in a contact dermatitis clinic in Northern Ireland. Contact Dermatitis 1993; 2: 258-261.
27. Burrows D. Hypersensitivity to mercury, nickel and chromium in relation to dental materials. Int Dent J 1986; 36: 30-34.
28. th ed. pp 171-202. Saunders, 2003.
29. th ed. pp 1758-1763. McGraw-Hill, 2006.
30. Rupp N W, Paffenbarger G C. Signi. cance to health of mercury used in dental practice: a review. J Am Dent Assoc 1971; 82: 1401-1407.
31. Kraepiel A M L, Keller K, Chin H B, Malcolm E G, Morel F M. Sources and variations of mercury in tuna. Environ Sci Technol 2003; 37: 5551-5558.
32. http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2003/12/04/mercury_tuna031204.html
33. Smith W E, Smith A M. Minamata: a warning to the world. London: Chatto & Windus, 1975.
34. th ed. pp 537, 794, 802. New Delhi: Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers.
35. United States Environmental Protection Agency. Task Force on Ritualistic Uses of Mercury Report. December 2002.
36. Alison Newby C, Riley D M, Leal-Almeraz T O. Mercury use and exposure among Santeria practitioners: religious versus folk practice in Northern New Jersey, USA. Ethn Health 2006; 11: 287-306.
37. Connealy L E. The Mad Hatter Syndrome: mercury and biological toxicity. 2006. www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml
38. http://www.glrppr.org/docs/mercury_in_industry.htm
39. http://www.ci.richland.wa.us/RICHLAND/enviro/docs/51/docs/ mercury%20awareness.pdf?CFID=438321&CFTOKEN=76697994
40. http://www.cleanairfoundation.org/switchout/mercury_canada_so.asp
41. Duxbury A J, Ead R D, McMurrough S, Watts D C. Allergy to mercury in dental amalgam. Br Dent J 1982; 152: 47.
42. Arnold N M. Allergy to mercury in amalgam fillings. J Am Med Assoc 1938; 13: 646.
43. Fernstrom A I B, Frykholm K O, Huldt S. Mercury allergy with eczematous allergy dermatitis due to silver amalgam fillings. Br Dent J 1962; 18: 204-206.
44. Spector L A. Allergic manifestation to mercury. J Am Dent Assoc 1951; 42: 320.
45. Hefferren J J. Usefulness of chemical analysis of head hair for exposure to mercury. J Am Dent Assoc 1976; 92: 1213-1216.
46. Bttistone G C, Hefferren J J, Miller R A, Cutright D E. Mercury: its relation to the dentist's health and dental practice characteristics. J Am Dent Assoc 1976; 92: 1182-1188.
47. Eames W B, Gaspar J D, Mohler C M. The mercury enigma in dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 1976; 92: 1199-1203.
48. Gronka P A, Bobkoskie R L, Tomchick G J, Bach F, Rakow A B. Mercury vapour exposures in dental offices. J Am Dent Assoc 1970; 81: 923-925.
49. Mantyla D G, Wright O D. Mercury toxicity in the dental office: a neglected problem. J Am Dent Assoc 1976; 92: 1189-1194.
50. Pagnotto L D, Comproni E M. The silent hazard: an unusual case of mercury contamination of a dental suite. J Am Dent Assoc 1976; 92: 1195-1198.
51. Naleway C, Sakaguchi R, Mitchell E, Muller T et al. Urinary mercury levels in US dentists, 1975-1983: review of health assessment. J Am Dent Assoc 1985; 111: 37-42.
52. Mackert J R. Dental amalgam and mercury. J Am Dent Assoc 1991; 8: 54-61.
53. Vimy M J, Lorscheider F L. Serial measurement of intraoral air mercury: estimation of daily dose from dental amalgam. J Dent Res 1985; 64: 1072-1075.
54. Berglund A. Estimation by a 24-hour study of daily dose of intraoral mercury vapour inhaled after release from dental amalgam. J Dent Res 1990; 69: 1646-1651.
55. Adams S. Allergies in the workplace. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2006; 19: 82-86.
56. Mackert J R, Leffell M S, Wagner D A, Powell B J. Lymphocyte levels in subjects with and without amalgam restorations. J Am Dent Assoc 1991; 122: 49-53.
57. Eversole L R. Allergic stomatitides. J Oral Med 1979; 34: 93-102.
58. Stejskal J, Stejskal V D M. The role of metals in autoimmunity and the link to neuroendocrinology. Neuro Endocrinol Lett 1999; 20: 351-364.
59. Eversole L R, Ringer M. The role of dental restorative metals in the pathogenesis of oral lichen planus. J Oral Surg 1984; 57: 383-387.
60. Henriksson E, Mattsson U, Hakansson J. Healing of lichenoid reaction reactions following removal of amalgam. A clinical follow-up. J Clin Periodontol 1995; 22: 287-294.
61. Bahmer K P. Oral lichenoid lesions, mercury hypersensitivity and combined hypersensitivity to mercury and other metals: histologically-proven reproduction of the reaction by patch testing with metal salts. Contact Dermatitis 1995; 33: 323-328.
62. Holmstrups P. Oral mucosa and skin reactions related to amalgam. Adv Dent Res 1992; 6: 120-124.
63. Bratel J, Hakeberg M, Jontell M. Effect of replacement of dental amalgam on oral lichenoid reactions. J Dent 1996; 24: 41-45.
64. Position paper. Oral features of mucocutaneous disorders. J Periodontol 2003; 74: 1545, 1545-1556.
65. Bolewska J, Holmstrup P, Moller-Moadsen B, Kenrad B, Danscher G. Amalgam associated accumulations in normal oral mucosa, oral mucosal lesions of lichen planus and contact lesions associated with amalgam. J Oral Pathol Med 1990; 19: 39-42.
66. Templeton D M. International union of pure and applied chemistry. Mechanisms of immunosensitization to metals (IUPAC Technical report). Pure Appl Chem 2004; 76: 1255-1268.
67. Eversole L M. Allergic stomatitis. J Oral Med 1979; 34: 93-102.
68. Bolewska J, Hnsen H J, Holmstrup P, Pindborg J J, Stangerup M. Oral mucosal lesions related to silver amalgam restorations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1990; 70: 55-58.
69. Lundstrom I M C. Allergy and corrosion of dental materials in patients with oral lichen planus. Int J Oral Surg 1984; 13: 16-24.
70. Finne K, Goransson K, Winckler L. Oral lichen planus and contact allergy to mercury. Int J Oral Surg 1982; 11: 236-239.
71. In Holmstrup P. Oral mucosa and skin reactions related to amalgam. Adv Dent Res 1992; 6: 120-124.
72. www.hermal.de/her_en/pages
73. Ismail S B, Kumar S K S, Zin R B. Oral lichen planus and lichenoid reactions: etiopathogenesis, diagnosis, management and malignant transformation. J Oral Sci 2007; 49: 89-106.
74. Namikoshi T, Yoshimatsu, Suga K, Fujii H, Yasuda K. The prevalence of sensitivity to constituents of dental alloys. J Oral Rehabil 1990; 17: 377-381.
75. Lssa Y, Duxburry A J, Macfarlane T V, Burtnon P A. Oral lichenoid lesions related to dental restorative materials. Br Dent J 2005; 198: 361-366.
76. Bolewska J, Hansen H J, Holmstrup P, Pindborg J J, Stangerup M. Oral mucosal lesions related to silver amalgam restorations. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1990; 70: 55-58.
77. Laine J, Kalimo K, Happonen R P. Contact allergy to dental restorative materials in patients with oral lichenoid lesions. Contact Dermatitis 1997; 36: 141-146.
78. Thornhill M H, Pemberton M N, Simmons R K, Theaker E D. Amalgam contact hypersensitivity lesions and oral lesion planus. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Endod 2003; 95: 291-299.
79. Wong L, Freeman S. Oral Lichenoid lesions (OLL) and mercury in amalgam fillings. Contact Dermatitis 2003; 48: 74-79.
80. Lind P O, Hurlen B, Lyberg T, Aas E. Amalgam related oral lichenoid reaction. Scand J Dent Res 1986; 94: 448-451.
81. National Council Against Health Fraud. Position Paper on Amalgam Fillings, 2002. www.ncahf.org
82. Fisher A A. The misuse of patch test to determine 'hypersensitivity' to mercury amalgam dental fillings. Cutis 1985; 35: 109, 112, 117.
83. Podzimek S, Prochazkova J, Bultasova L, Bartova J et al. Sensitisation to inorganic mercury could be a risk factor for infertility. Neuro Endocrinol Lett 2005; 26: 277-282.
84. Eley B M. The future of dental amalgam: a review of the literature, part 2- mercury exposure in dental practice. Br Dent J 1997; 182: 293-297.
85. Grossman L I, Dannenberg J R. Amount of mercury vapor in air of dental of.ces and laboratories. J Dent Res 1949; 28: 435-438.
86. Recommendations in mercury hygiene. J Am Dent Assoc 1976; 92: 1217.
87. Newman S M. Amalgam alternatives: what can compete? J Am Dent Assoc 1997; 122: 66-71.