Guinea pig maximization test with a polyether impression material.
Adverse reactions to a polyether rubber impression material introduced in the mid-sixties have been reported in the literature. Most of the reports are inconclusive regarding the distinction between allergic and toxic responses. The aim of this study was to assess the allergenic potential of this material using a guinea pig maximization test. Ten guinea pigs in the experimental group were sensitized in two steps. First, an extract of the material was injected intradermally, and 7 days later, the material mixed in petrolatum was applied topically. After another 2 wk test solutions were applied, and the skin response was evaluated by visual inspection. Ten nonsensitized animals served as controls. From the challenge test it was evident that the catalyst as well as the freshly mixed material elicited positive skin reactions interpreted as being delayed hypersensitivity reactions. The findings indicate that the material contained substances which could be classified as strong to extreme sensitizers. Some of the adverse reactions seen in connection with the use of this material might well be related to delayed hypersensitivity reactions.
Hensten-Pettersen
A
A
NIOM, Scandinavian Institute of Dental Materials, Haslum, Norway.
Nilner
K
K
Möller
B
B
D000485:Allergens; D000818:Animals; D001388:Aziridines / Q000009:adverse effects; D001557:Benzenesulfonates / Q000009:adverse effects; D003760:Dental Impression Materials / Q000009:adverse effects*; D003877:Dermatitis, Contact / Q000209:etiology; D005260:Female; D006168:Guinea Pigs; D006968:Hypersensitivity, Delayed / Q000209:etiology*; D011095:Polyethylenes / Q000009:adverse effects; D012117:Resins, Synthetic / Q000009:adverse effects*; D012882:Skin Tests
D000485:Allergens; D001388:Aziridines; D001557:Benzenesulfonates; D003760:Dental Impression Materials; C022821:Impregum; D011095:Polyethylenes; D012117:Resins, Synthetic; C033132:aziridine; C014095:methyldichlorobenzene sulfonate