ArticleContact dermatitis2026
Patch Test Reactions to Dental Materials: A Retrospective Single-Centre Study.
Article in Contact dermatitis, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatch testing is used when delayed-type hypersensitivity to dental materials is suspected, but no European baseline series exists for patients with suspected allergy to dental materials.
objectivesTo describe patch test positivity to a 24-allergen dental series, assess the added yield of late readings at D6/7 and characterise methacrylate reactivity patterns.
methodsIn this retrospective single-centre study, 439 adults referred between 2016 and 2025 for suspected allergy to dental materials were patch tested with an institutional 24-allergen dental series comprising 11 metals, 8 methacrylates and 5 other substances. Reactions were read on D3 and D6/7 and scored by ICDRG criteria.
resultsOverall, 50.1% of patients had at least one positive reaction, and 41.0% had a positive metal reaction. Nickel (23.0%) and palladium (16.6%) were the most frequent allergens. Amongst methacrylates, HEMA (3.6%), HPMA (3.0%) and EGDMA (2.5%) were most frequent. Amongst methacrylate-positive patients, 44.4% had two or more positive reactions, 40.7% were HEMA-negative and 14.8% were HEMA-negative but HPMA-positive. Across all allergens, 19.8% of positive reactions were detectable only at D6/7, corresponding to a 24.7% relative increase in detection compared with D3 alone.
conclusionsLate readings improved detection, and methacrylate reactivity was not fully captured by HEMA alone.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.