Pilot Study of Photoallergic Reactions to UV Filters among Dental Professionals

Abstract

Aims: To evaluate if there are photoallergic reactions to selected UV filters among dental professionals (dentists, nurses and attendants) and dental patients. Study Design: In the study were included dental professionals, occupationally exposed to UV-filters containing dental materials, and randomly chosen dental patients of different gender, age and occupations, the main inclusion criteria being the lack of occupational exposure to dental materials. Place and Duration of Study: Department “Oral and Image Diagnostic”, Faculty of Dental Medicine, Medical University of Sofia, between July 2014 and March 2015. Methodology: We included a total of 59 participants: 25 occupationally exposed dental professionals (15 women and 10 men; mean age 43.57±8.76) and 34 dental patients (14 women and 20 men; mean age 40.41±14.17). Skin photopatch testing with Benzophenone – 3, Benzophenone – 4, Para-aminobenzoic acid (PABA), BUTYL METHOXY-DIBENZOYL-METHANE, and 2,2-bis-[4-(2-hydroxy-3-methacrylo-xypropoxy)phenyl]-propane (BIS-GMA) (Chemotechnique Diagnostics) was performed, according to: Photopatch testing: a consensus methodology for Europe. Results: Results for positive reactions to Benzophenone-3 and Benzophenone-4 showed no significant differences between the groups. A non-significant increase in the number of the reactions was observed among women (for Benzophenone-3 - 24.1% incidence after exposure to UV-irradiation vs 13.8% before - P=.23; for Benzophenone-4 - 13.8% after exposure to UV-irradiation vs 6.9% before, P=.63), and dental patients, (for Benzophenone-3 - 20.6% incidence after exposure to UV-irradiation vs 8.8% before - P=.75; for Benzophenone-4 - 14.7% after exposure to UV-irradiation vs 11.8% before, P=.54%). No reactions of photosensitization to PABA were observed in our study, no statistical significances between the studied groups were revealed. Concerning the positive skin patch test reactions to BUTYL METHOXY-DIBENZOYL-METHANE, no significant differences between the groups were revealed (P=.08). Results for positive reactions to Bis-GMA showed highest sensitization rates in all groups defined by us, but no significant differences between the groups were established (P=.40; P=.33). Conclusion: The present pilot investigation failed to demonstrate any photosensitizing effect, but the sample is too small to determine if there is a tendency to increased activity of certain materials. Further work is needed to validate reliability.