Dental materials can cause reactions to the oral mucosa and present to the general dental practitioner. These are often referred to as 'allergies' but are frequently lichenoid reactions. Most of these are related to dental amalgam restorations and can be remedied by replacing the restoration with another suitable material. Other metals, including gold, palladium, nickel and chrome, have also been reported to trigger mucosal changes. Less commonly, issues arise from other restorative materials, including denture acrylics, composites and glass polyalkenoates. Reactions are also reported due to endodontic and sealing materials. It is unclear what role skin 'patch' testing has in managing dental material allergies. This article aims to give the practitioner a clearer picture of dental material allergy issues and how they should be approached in primary dental practice.
Most reactions to dental materials occur due to amalgam restorations.
Reactions to denture materials will cause erythema of the denture-bearing area only.
Contact sensitivity (patch) testing has a limited role to play in identifying suitable restorative materials in an individual patient.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution
Subscribe to Journal
Get full journal access for 1 year
only $4.96 per issue
All prices are NET prices.
VAT will be added later in the checkout.
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.
All prices are NET prices.
Gawkrodger D J. Investigating of reactions to dental materials. Br J Dermatol 2005; 153: 479-485.
Koch P, Bahmer F A. Oral lesions and symptoms related to metals used in dental restorations: A clinical, allergological, and histologic study. J Am Acad Dermatol 1999; 41: 422-430.
Magnusson B, Bergman M, Bergman B, Söremark R. Nickel allergy and nickel-containing dental alloys. Scand J Dent Res 1982; 90: 163-167.
Van Noort R, Gjerdet N R, Schedle A, Björkman L, Berglund A. An overview of the current status of national reporting systems for adverse reactions to dental materials. J Dent 2004; 32: 351-358.
Scott A, Egner W, Gawkrodger D J et al. The national survey of adverse reactions to dental materials in the UK: a preliminary study by the UK Adverse Reactions Reporting Project. Br Dent J 2004; 196: 471-477.
Jacobsen N, Aasenden R, Hensten-Pettersen A. Occupational health complaints and adverse patient reactions as perceived by personnel in public dentistry. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 1991; 19: 155-159.
Kallus T, Mjör I A. Incidence of adverse effects of dental materials. Scand J Dent Res 1991; 99: 236-240.
World Health Organisation. Future use of materials for dental restoration: report of the meeting convened at WHO HQ Geneva, Switzerland 16th to 17th November 2009. 2010. Available at https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/202500/9789241500647_eng.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y (accessed April 2022).
Rai R, Dinakar D, Kurlan S.S, Bindoo Y A. Investigation of contact allergy to dental materials by patch testing. Indian Dermatol Online J 2014; 5: 282-286.
Xin Zhang X, Li-Cheng W, Wu B, Li-Ying Y, Xiao-Ping W, Yue Liu. A comparative analysis of metal allergens associated with dental alloy prostheses and the expression of HLA-DR in gingival tissue. Mol Med Rep 2016; 13: 91-98.
Alanko K, Kanerva L, Jolanki R, Kannas L, Estlander T. Oral mucosal disease investigated by patch testing with a dental screening. Contact Dermatitis 1996; 34: 263-267.
Dunsche A, Kästel I, Terheyden H, Springer I N G, Christophers E, Brasch J. Oral lichenoid reactions associated with amalgam improvement after amalgam removal. Br J Dermatol 2003; 148: 70-76.
Garau V, Masala M G, Cortis, M C, Pittau R. Contact stomatitis due to palladium in dental alloys: a clinical report. J Prosthet Dent 2005; 93: 318-320.
Henriksson E, Mattsson U, Hakansson J. Healing of lichenoid reactions following removal of amalgam. A clinical follow-up. J Clin Periodontol 1995; 22: 287-294.
Fitzpatrick S G, Hirsch S A, Gordon S C. The malignant transformation of oral lichen planus and oral lichenoid lesions: a systematic review. J Am Dent Assoc. 2014; 145: 45-56.
Staines K S, Wray D. Amalgamtattooassociated oral lichenoid lesion. Contact Dermatitis 2007; 56: 240-241.
Bolewska J, Holmstrup P, Moller-Madsen B, Kenrad B, Datischer G. Amalgam associated mercury 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.
Melchart D, Vogt S, Köhler W et al. Treatment of health complaints attributed to amalgam. J Dent Res 2008; 87: 349-353.
Weidenhammer W, Bornschein S, Zilker T, Eyer F, Melchart D, Hausteiner C. Predictors of treatment outcomes after removal of amalgam fillings: associations between subjective symptoms, psychometric variables and mercury levels. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2010; 38: 180-189.
Faurschou A, Menné T, Johansen J D, Thyssen J P. Metal allergen of the 21st Century - a review on exposure, epidemiology and clinical manifestations of palladium allergy. Contact Dermatitis 2011; 64: 185-195.
Muris J, Goossens A, Gonçalo M et al. Sensitization to palladium and nickel in Europe and the relationship with oral disease and dental alloys. Contact Dermatitis 2015; 72: 286-296.
Hildebrand H F, Veron C, Maxtin P. Nickel, chromium, cobalt dental alloys and allergic reactions: an overview. Biomaterials 1989; 10: 545-548.
Kettelarij J A B, Lidén C, Axén E, Julander A. Cobalt, nickel and chromium release from dental tools and alloys. Contact Dermatitis 2014; 70: 3-10.
Sicilia A, Cuesta S, Coma G et al. Titanium allergy in dental implant patients: a clinical study on 1500 consecutive patients. Clin Oral Implants Res 2008; 19: 823-835.
Ghosh S, Nambiar S, Patil S et al. Allergic and immunologic response of the oral mucosa: An overview. Int J Clin Dent Sci 2016; 6: 1-7.
Beyer D J, Belsito D V. Delayed hypersensitivity to silicon causing gingival hyperplasia. Contact Dermatitis 1997; 37: 234-234.
Peterson M R, Wong P H, Dickson S D, Coop C A. Allergic Stomatitis From Orthodontic Adhesives. Mil Med 2017; DOI: 10.7205/MILMED-D-16-00232.
Gonçalves T S, Morganti M A, Campos L C, Rizzatto S M D, Menezes L M. Allergy to auto-polymerized acrylic resin in an orthodontic patient. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2006; 129: 431-435.
Shiratori T, Sowa-Osako J, Fukai K, Tsuruta D. Severe stomatitis with a deep buccal ulcer associated with an allergic reaction to methyl methacrylate used for dental treatment. Contact Dermatitis 2017; 77: 406-407.
Giunta J L, Grauer I, Zablotsky N. Allergic contact stomatitis caused by acrylic resin. J Prosthet Dent 1979; 42: 188-190.
Moore M M, Burke F J, Felix D H. Allergy to a common component of resin-bonding systems: a case report. Dent Update 2000; 27: 432-434.
Geukens S, Goossens A. Occupational contact allergy to (meth)acrylates. Contact Dermatitis 2001; 44: 153-159.
Goon A T J, Isaksson M, Zimerson E, Goh C L, Bruze M. Contact allergy to (meth)acrylates in the dental series in southern Sweden: simultaneous positive patch test reaction patterns and possible screening allergens. Contact Dermatitis 2006; 55: 219-226.
Van Noort R. Introduction to Dental Materials. 4th ed. Missouri: Mosby, 2013.
Rykke M. Dental materials for posterior restorations. Endod Dent Traumatol 1992; 8: 139-148.
Schedle A, Örtengren U, Eidler N, Gabauer M, Hensten A. Do adverse effects of dental materials exist? What are the consequences, and how can they be diagnosed and treated? Clin Oral Implants Res 2007; 18: 232-256.
Wilson A D, Kent B E. The glass-ionomer cement, a new translucent dental filling material. J Applied Chem Biotechnol 2007; 21: 313.
Nicholson J, Czarnecka B. The biocompatibility of resin-modified glass-ionomer cements for dentistry. Dent Mater 2008; 24: 1702-1708.
Almeida T F A, Oliveira S R, de Noronha M S et al. Type IV hypersensitivity associated with restorative materials: Clinical report and systematic literature review. J Prosthet Dent 2021; DOI: 10.1016/j.prosdent.2021.01.034.
Spencer H R, Ike V, Brennan P A. Review: the use of sodium hypochlorite in endodontics - potential complications and their management. Br Dent J 2007; 202: 555-559.
Çalişkan M K, Türkün M, Alper S. Allergy to sodium hypochlorite during root canal therapy: a case report. Int Endod J 1994; 27: 163-167.
Kaufman A Y, Kelia S. Hypersensitivity to sodium hypochlorite. J Endod 1989; 15: 224-226.
Mehra P, Clancy C, Wu J. Formation of a facial haematoma during endodontic therapy. J Am Dent Assoc 2000; 131: 67-71.
Witton R, Henthorn K, Ethunandan M, Harmer S, Brennan P A. Neurological complications following extrusion of sodium hypochlorite solution during root canal treatment. Int Endod J 2005; 38: 843-848.
Becking A G. Complications in the use of sodium hypochlorite during endodontic treatment. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol 1991; 71: 346-348.
Syed M, Chopra R, Sachdev V. Allergic Reactions to Dental Materials - A Systematic Review. J Clin Diagn Res 2015; DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2015/15640.6589.
Wantke F, Haemmer W, Haglmüller T, Götz M, Jarisch R. Anaphylaxis after dental treatment with a formaldehyde-containing tooth-filling material. Allergy 1995; 50: 274-276.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
About this article
Cite this article
Fletcher, R., Harrison, W. & Crighton, A. Dental material allergies and oral soft tissue reactions. Br Dent J 232, 620–625 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41415-022-4195-9