ALLERGIC REACTIONS RELATED TO DENTAL PROSTHESES DIAGNOSTIC AND THERAPEUTIC APPROACHES

Аннотация

This article examines the nature, diagnosis, and treatment of allergic reactions associated with dental prostheses, focusing on both clinical manifestations and effective therapeutic strategies. Allergic responses caused by acrylic, metal, and composite-based prosthetic materials may include contact stomatitis, oral mucosal burning and itching, erythema, and in some cases, systemic hypersensitivity symptoms. The study evaluates the immunological impact of common prosthetic components—such as monomers, nickel, and chromium alloys— based on clinical observations and allergological testing. Diagnostic approaches included skin patch tests, elimination testing, and laboratory-based immunological assays to identify material- specific sensitivities. The article emphasizes the importance of individual sensitivity screening when selecting prosthetic materials and highlights preventive strategies aimed at reducing allergic reactions. These include the use of hypoallergenic and biocompatible materials, alongside pharmacological interventions such as antihistamines, topical corticosteroids, and supportive oral hygiene measures. The findings advocate for early detection and material safety protocols indental practice to ensure patient well-being and long-term prosthetictolerance. Keywords: dental prostheses, allergic reactions, contact stomatitis, biocompatibility, prosthetic materials, nickel allergy, diagnostictesting, patch test, oral mucosa, treatment strategies Relevance: The increasing use of diverse prosthetic materials in modern dentistry—particularly acrylics, metal alloys, and composites—has led to a rise in the number of patients experiencing allergic reactions to dental prostheses. These reactions not only compromise the success and longevity of prosthetic treatments but also significantly affect patients' overall oral health and qualityof life. Given the subtle and often delayed onset of allergic manifestations, such as burning sensations, mucosal irritation, and contact stomatitis, clinicians may overlook or misdiagnose the underlying cause. Moreover, the lack of routine allergological screening prior to prosthetic placement further exacerbates the risk of hypersensitivity reactions. This study is relevant as it addresses a critical gap in dental practice: the need for early identification, accurate diagnosis, and effective management of prosthesis-induced allergic reactions. By providing a comparative analysis of materials, outlining diagnostic tools (e.g., patch testing), and reviewing therapeutic strategies, the article offers a valuable guide for dental professionals. It promotes evidence-based decision- making in prosthetic material selection and patient-centered care, ultimately contributing to safer, morepersonalized, and biocompatibledental treatment outcomes. Purpose of the study: The primary purpose of this study is to investigate the etiology, clinical presentation, and management of allergic reactions associated with dental prosthetic materials. https://ijmri.de/index.php/jmsi volume 4,issue5,2025 1259 Specifically, the study aims to: Identify the most common types of prosthetic materials that elicit hypersensitivity responses in patients , Analyze the clinical manifestations of prosthesis-induced allergic reactions, particularly contact stomatitis and mucosal inflammation , Evaluate the effectiveness of current diagnostic approaches, including allergological testing methods such as patch tests and elimination protocols, Review and assess therapeutic strategies used to manage allergic reactions, with emphasis on pharmacological interventions and material substitution, Propose clinical guidelines for the selection of biocompatible prosthetic materials and the prevention of allergenic complications in dental practice. Through this study, the authors seek to enhance awareness among dental professionals about material-related sensitivities and to promoteevidence-based practices that prioritizepatient safety and long-term oral health. Materials and methods of research. This study was conducted to evaluate allergic responses to various dental prosthetic materials using clinical observation, allergological testing, and therapeutic outcome assessment. The research design was descriptive and comparative in nature. A total of 80 patients aged between 25 and 70 years, all of whom were undergoing prosthodontic treatment (fixed or removable), were selected from a dental clinic. Inclusion criteria included: Presence of symptoms suggestive of an allergic reaction (e.g., burning sensation, mucosal irritation, erythema); Use of dental prostheses made from acrylic, metal alloys (e.g., nickel- chromium), or composite materials; No systemic immunological disorders or recent use of immunosuppressive therapy. All patients underwent intraoral examination to assess: Signs of contact stomatitis, inflammation, or lesions associated with prosthetic surfaces; Type, material, andduration of prosthesis use. Diagnosticproced