Skip to content
Research Article Open access CC BY 3.0

Health Risk Assessment in Exposure to Methacrylic Monomers in Dental Practice

Maya Lyapina, Maria Dencheva, Assya Krasteva, Mariana Tzekova, Mariela Deliverska, Angelina Kisselova, Jeny Staikova

Journal of Scientific Research and Reports · pp. 2848–2863 · Published 6 Sep 2014

10.9734/JSRR/2014/12982

Abstract

Aims: To evaluate the health status and to assess the risk of adverse health effects manifestation among occupationally exposed to methacrylic monomers dental professionals (dentists, nurses and attendants) and students of dental medicine and from the dental technician school, as well as to determine the incidence of sensitization to some methacrylic monomers in dental practice. Place and Duration of Study: Department “Oral and Image Diagnostic”, Medical University, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Sofia, Bulgaria, between January 2014 and July 2014. Methodology: A questionnaire survey, including a review of medical summary of history was performed among 262 participants – 213 exposed to methacrylic monomers in dental practice and education (dental professionals, students of dental medicine and from Dental technician school), mean age 30.9, and 49 non-exposed healthy referents – dental patients, mean age 45.1. Skin patch testing with methyl methacrylate (MMA), triethyleneglycol dimethacrylate (TREGDMA), ethyleneglycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA), 2,2-bis[4-(2-hydroxy-3-methacrylo-xypropoxy) phenyl] propane (BIS-GMA), 2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate (2-HEMA), tetrahidrofurfuril metacrylate and glutaraldehyde was performed. Results: Significantly higher incidence and risk of manifestation of subjective symptoms from the skin (OR=2.20, CI=1.12 – 4.34, P = .020) and the upper respiratory tract (OR=2.26, CI=1.45 – 4.45, P = .017) were established among the referents group. Occupational and during education exposures to the tested methacrylic monomers and to glutaraldehyde didn’t result in increased incidence of sensitization (P> .050). An increased incidence and OR for manifestation of concomitant sensitization to methacrylic monomers and glutaraldehyde was revealed, with very high significance, (P < .001, OR=4.52, CI=2.33 – 8.74). Men could be outlined as a group at risk of sensitization. Our results confirm the cross-reactivity of acrylic compounds – 43.9% of all the participants were allergic to more than one of the tested monomers. Conclusion: No role of exposure to methacrylic monomers in dental practice and education for increased incidence and risk of manifestation of irritant effects, subjective symptoms and sensitization were established. An increased incidence and risk of concomitant sensitization to methacrylic monomers and glutaraldehyde and of cross-reactivity of acrylic compounds were observed.

Methacrylic monomers glutaraldehyde sensitization cross-reactivity dentistry occupational exposure risk assessment

References (40)

  1. 1 Genetic and Cellular Toxicology of Dental Resin Monomers [DOI]
  2. 2 Molecular Toxicology of Substances Released from Resin–Based Dental Restorative Materials [DOI]
  3. 3 Toxicity of methyl methacrylate in dentistry [DOI]
  4. 4 Investigation of reactions to dental materials [DOI]
  5. 5 Surgical Applications of Methyl Methacrylate: A Review of Toxicity [DOI]
  6. 6 Methacrylate and acrylate allergy in dental personnel [DOI]
  7. 7 Contact allergy and hand eczema in Swedish dentists [DOI]
  8. 8 Contact allergy to (meth)acrylates in the dental series in southern Sweden: simultaneous positive patch test reaction patterns and possible screening allergens [DOI]
  9. 9 Occupational respiratory hypersensitivity in dental personnel [DOI]
  10. 10 Acrylates in Contact Dermatitis [DOI]
  11. 11 Occupational skin diseases among dental nurses [DOI]
  12. 12 A multicenter study of patch test reactions with dental screening series [DOI]
  13. 13 Cross-reactions of multifunctional methacrylates and acrylates [DOI]
  14. 14 Occupational methacrylate and acrylate allergy – cross‐reactions and possible screening allergens [DOI]
  15. 15 The national survey of adverse reactions to dental materials in the UK: a preliminary study by the UK Adverse Reactions Reporting Project [DOI]
  16. 16 Patterns of cell death induced by eluates from denture base acrylic resins in U‐937 human monoblastoid cells [DOI]
  17. 17 Local and systemic effects of unpolymerised monomers.
  18. 18 Acrylate Contact Allergy: Patient Characteristics and Evaluation of Screening Allergens [DOI]
  19. 19 Bisphenol A-glycidyl methacrylate induces a broad spectrum of DNA damage in human lymphocytes [DOI]
  20. 20 Respiratory effects of exposure to methacrylates among dental assistants [DOI]
  21. 21 Methyl methacrylate toxicity in rat nasal epithelium: studies of the mechanism of action and comparisons between species [DOI]
  22. 22 Occupational exposure to methyl methacrylate monomer induces generalised neuropathy in a dental technician [DOI]
  23. 23 Influence of TEGDMA on the mammalian cell cycle in comparison with chemotherapeutic agents [DOI]
  24. 24 Biological monitoring and possible health effects in workers occupationally exposed to methyl methacrylate [DOI]
  25. 25 Reactions to resin‐based dental materials in patients–type, time to onset, duration, and consequence of the reaction [DOI]
  26. 26 Occupational contact allergic dermatitis in dentistry [DOI]
  27. 27 Prediction of the reduced glutathione (GSH) reactivity of dental methacrylate monomers using NMR spectra-Relationship between toxicity and GSH reactivity [DOI]
  28. 28 American Contact Dermatitis Society [DOI]
  29. 29 Atypical pattern of (meth)acrylate allergic contact dermatitis in dental professionals [DOI]
  30. 30 Prevalence of self‐reported hand eczema and skin symptoms associated with dental materials among Swedish dentists [DOI]
  31. 31 Cytotoxicity of ingredients of various dental materials and related compounds in L2‐ and A549 cells [DOI]
  32. 32 Work-related skin and airway symptoms among Swedish dentists rarely cause sick leave or change of professional career [DOI]
  33. 33 Side Effects and Complications of Dental Materials on Oral Cavity [DOI]
  34. 34 METHACRYLATE AND ACRYLATE ALLERGY IN DENTAL STUDENTS. [DOI]
  35. 35 Adverse health reactions in skin, eyes, and respiratory tract among dental personnel in Sweden.
  36. 36 GI Motor Inhibition Associated with Acute Exposure to Methyl Methacrylate Vapor [DOI]
  37. 37 Assessment of methyl methacrylate vapor toxicity on the rat tracheal epithelium [DOI]
  38. 38 New filling materials--an occupational health hazard.
  39. 39 [Contact dermatitis, due to (di)methacrylates, on the hands of dental personnel].
  40. 40 [New dental materials a health risk for dental staff. Acrylates can cause contact allergy and other problems].

Cited by 2

The role of sensitization to dental materials for the manifestation of idiopathic urticaria and angioedema

M. Dencheva, Maya Ljapina, D. Iovchev · 2017

Showing 1 of 2 known citations — external sources report more than can currently be individually listed.

Related research

Article metrics

Real usage data collected on this platform.

91

Page views

0

PDF downloads

44

Outbound clicks

2

Citations

Views over time

Views by country

Approximate, from request IP at view time — not citizenship or institution. Countries with fewer than 5 views are grouped as "Other".

Traffic sources

Referring site, by host.

Views and downloads exclude known bots/crawlers. Citations combines this platform's own DOI-resolved index with each external source's own reported total — see Cited by above for individually listed citing works. Last refreshed 0 seconds ago.