ArticleEFORT open reviews2026
Orthopedic implant allergies: a review of current knowledge on metal hypersensitivity and prosthesis failure.
Article in EFORT open reviews, 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Metal hypersensitivity is an increasingly recognized factor in orthopedic implant failure, particularly in patients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA), and may contribute to persistent pain, aseptic loosening, or early revision. This review synthesizes current evidence on the underlying immune mechanisms of metal hypersensitivity and explores their potential role in implant-related complications such as chronic inflammation, pain, and aseptic loosening. A systematic literature search was conducted using Embase.com and complementary databases; relevant studies involving patients with suspected or confirmed allergic responses to metallic orthopedic implants were identified and integrated into a narrative review of clinical presentations, diagnostic strategies, and outcomes. Diagnostic approaches remain variable and include clinical evaluation, dermatological patch testing, in vitro assays such as the lymphocyte transformation test (LTT), and histopathological examination of periprosthetic tissues, with no current consensus on a gold-standard method. Although metal hypersensitivity is associated with a subset of implant failures, the strength of evidence is limited by heterogeneous study designs, variable diagnostic criteria, and inconsistent reporting of outcomes. Future efforts should focus on standardizing diagnostic protocols, validating predictive tests, and developing patient-specific management algorithms - particularly regarding implant material selection - to improve care for patients with suspected metal allergies in orthopedic surgery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.