Advertisement

Nickel

  • Anneli JulanderEmail author
  • Carola Lidén
Reference work entry

Abstract

Nickel is the most frequent cause of contact allergy, affecting up to 22% of women and 5% of men, and hand eczema is reported by 30–40% of nickel-allergic individuals. Certain occupational groups are much more affected. Occupational skin exposure to nickel is an important risk factor for hand eczema. Exposure reduction is essential for prevention.

Pure nickel metal, nickel-containing alloys, coatings, and compounds have different ability to release nickel ions and to cause sensitization and dermatitis. The dimethylglyoxime test is useful in assessment of nickel exposure and exposure reduction in the workplace and elsewhere. Skin exposure to nickel can be quantified, and knowledge on exposure levels will contribute to improved risk assessment and prevention.

Nickel release from articles intended for prolonged contact with the skin is restricted in the EU. In an attempt to improve protection, the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) has defined that “prolonged contact” in relation to nickel is 10 min or more and has explained that the restriction covers articles for workers, professionals, and consumers. It should be recalled that also short and repetitive contact contributes significantly to nickel exposure.

Keywords

Acid wipe sampling Alloys Cashiers Coins Construction workers Dimethylglyoxime test DMG test Nickel directive Exposure reduction Hairdressers Metal workers Nickel Nickel release Nickel restriction Platers Prevention Exposure assessment Stainless steel Tools 

References

  1. Ahlström MG, Thyssen JP, Menné T, Johansen JD (2017) Prevalence of nickel allergy in Europe following the EU Nickel Directive – a review. Contact Dermatitis 77(4):193–200PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Basketter DA, Scholes EW, Kimber I (1994) The performance of the local lymph-node assay with chemicals identified as contact allergens in the human maximization test. Food Chem Toxicol 32(6):543–547.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-6915(94)90112-0PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Biesterbos J, Yazar K, Lidén C (2010) Nickel on the Swedish market: follow-up 10 years after entry into force of the EU Nickel Directive. Contact Dermatitis 63(6):333–339.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2010.01812.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blaschko A (1889) Berufsdermatosen der Arbeiter. Ein Beitrag zur Gewerbehygiene (I). Das Galvaniseur-Ekzem. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 15:925–927CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boonstra MB, Christoffers WA, Coenraads PJ, Schuttelaar MLA (2015) Patch test results of hand eczema patients: relation to clinical types. JEADV 29(5):940–947.  https://doi.org/10.1111/jdv.12735PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chen JK, Thyssen JP (2018) Metal allergy. From dermatitis to implant and device failure. Springer (in press)Google Scholar
  7. Coenraads PJ, Nater JP, Jansen HA, Lantinga H (1984) Prevalence of eczema and other dermatoses of the hands and forearms in construction workers in the Netherlands. Clin Exp Dermatol 9(2):149–158PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Conde-Salazar L, Guimaraens D, Villegas C, Romero A, Gonzalez MA (1995) Occupational allergic contact dermatitis in construction workers. Contact Dermatitis 33(4):226–230PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DeKoven JG et al (2017) North American contact dermatitis group patch test results 2013–2014. Dermatitis 28(1):33–46.  https://doi.org/10.1097/der.0000000000000225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Diepgen TL et al (2016) Prevalence of contact allergy in the general population in different European regions. Br J Dermatol 174(2):319–329.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.14167CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Erfani B, Lidén C, Midander K (2015) Short and frequent skin contact with nickel. Contact Dermatitis 73(4):222–230.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12426PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Erfani B, Midander K, Lidén C, Julander A (2017) Development, validation and testing of a skin sampling method for assessment of metal exposure. Contact Dermatitis 77(1):17–24.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12781PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. European Chemicals Agency ECHA (2014) Prolonged contact with the skin – definition building for nickel (Entry 27 of Annex XVII to REACH). https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/13641/nickel_restriction_prolonged_contact_skin_en.pdf. Accessed 20 Aug 2017
  14. European Chemicals Agency ECHA (2017) Classification and labelling inventory (C&L Inventory). https://echa.europa.eu/information-on-chemicals/cl-inventory-database/. Accessed 20 Aug 2017
  15. European Chemicals Agency ECHA (2017a) Draft guideline on articles intended to come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin in relation to restriction entry 27 of Annex XVII to REACH on: nickel and nickel compounds. https://echa.europa.eu/documents/10162/5dea96fd-1db4-4b64-1572-19858939d8fd. Accessed 20 Aug 2017
  16. European Commission (2009) Commission Regulation (EC) No 552/2009 of June 2009 amending Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH) as regards Annex XVII. Off J Eur Union L164:7–31Google Scholar
  17. European Committee for Standardization CEN (2002) Screening tests for nickel release from alloys and coatings in items that come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. CEN/CR 12471Google Scholar
  18. European Committee for Standardization CEN (2009) Method for the simulation of wear and corrosion for the detection of nickel release from coated items. EN 12472:2005+A1:2009Google Scholar
  19. European Committee for Standardization CEN (2015) Reference test method for release of nickel from all post assemblies which are inserted into pierced parts of the human body and articles intended to come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. EN 1811:2011+A1:2015Google Scholar
  20. Fall S et al (2015) Contact allergy trends in Sweden – a retrospective comparison of patch test data from 1992, 2000, and 2009. Contact Dermatitis 72(5):297–304.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12346PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Feigl F (1972) Spot tests in inorganic analysis, 6th edn. Elsevier, AmsterdamGoogle Scholar
  22. Fischer T (1989) Occupational nickel dermatitis. In: Maibach HI, Menné T (eds) Nickel and the skin: immunology and toxicology. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  23. Fischer LA, Johansen JD, Menné T (2007) Nickel allergy: relationship between patch test and repeated open application test thresholds. Br J Dermatol 157(4):723–729.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2007.08095.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Flint GN (1998) A metallurgical approach to metal contact dermatitis. Contact Dermatitis 39(5):213–221.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1998.tb05912.xPubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Friedmann PS, Sanchez-Elsner T, Schnuch A (2015) Genetic factors in susceptibility to contact sensitivity. Contact Dermatitis 72(5):263–274.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gambichler T, Boms S, Freitag M (2004) Contact dermatitis and other skin conditions in instrumental musicians. BMC Dermatol 4:3.  https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-5945-4-3PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Garg S et al (2013) Nickel allergy following European Union regulation in Denmark, Germany, Italy and the U.K. Br J Dermatol 169(4):854–858.  https://doi.org/10.1111/bjd.12556PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gawkrodger DJ, McLeod CW, Dobson K (2012) Nickel skin levels in different occupations and an estimate of the threshold for reacting to a single open application of nickel in nickel-allergic subjects. Br J Dermatol 166(1):82–87.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2011.10644.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Geier J, Schnuch A (1998) Kontaktallergien im Bau-Hauptgewerbe. Eine Auswertung der Daten des Informationsverbunds Dermatologischer Kliniken (IVDK) 1994—1996. Dermatosen 46:109–114Google Scholar
  30. German Institute for Standardization DIN (2017) Screening test for nickel release from consumer articles which are inserted into pierced parts of the human body and consumer articles that come into direct and prolonged contact with the skin. DIN 13093Google Scholar
  31. Hamann CR, Hamann D, Hamann C, Thyssen JP, Lidén C (2013) The cost of nickel allergy: a global investigation of coin composition and nickel and cobalt release. Contact Dermatitis 68(1):15–22.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12008PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Haudrechy P et al (1997) Nickel release from stainless steels. Contact Dermatitis 37(3):113–117PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hostynek JJ, Dreher F, Nakada T, Schwindt D, Anigbogu A, Maibach HI (2001) Human stratum corneum adsorption of nickel salts. Investigation of depth profiles by tape stripping in vivo. Acta Derm Venereol Suppl (Stockh) 212:11–18Google Scholar
  34. International Agency for Research on Cancer IARC (2017) List of classifications, volumes 1–119. http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Classification/latest_classif.php. Accessed 20 Aug 2017
  35. Jensen P, Thyssen JP, Johansen JD, Skare L, Menné T, Lidén C (2011) Occupational hand eczema caused by nickel and evaluated by quantitative exposure assessment. Contact Dermatitis 64(1):32–36.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2010.01819.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Johansen JD et al (2015) European Society of Contact Dermatitis guideline for diagnostic patch testing – recommendations on best practice. Contact Dermatitis 73(4):195–221.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12432CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Josefson A, Färm G, Magnuson A, Meding B (2009) Nickel allergy as risk factor for hand eczema: a population-based study. Br J Dermatol 160(4):828–834.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2008.09006.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Julander A, Skare L, Mulder M, Grandér M, Vahter M, Lidén C (2010) Skin deposition of nickel, cobalt, and chromium in production of gas turbines and space propulsion components. Ann Occup Hyg 54(3):340–350.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annhyg/meq002PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Julander A, Skare L, Vahter M, Lidén C (2011) Nickel deposited on the skin-visualization by DMG test. Contact Dermatitis 64(3):151–157.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2010.01856.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Julander A et al (2013) New UK nickel-plated steel coins constitute an increased allergy and eczema risk. Contact Dermatitis 68(6):323–330.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12092PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Julander A, Boman A, Johanson G, Lidén C (2018) Occupational skin exposure to chemicals. With focus on skin exposure assessment, skin sensitisation and prevention by exposure reduction. The nordic expert group for criteria documentation of health risks from chemicals. Arbete och Hälsa (in press)Google Scholar
  42. Kanerva L, Kiilunen M, Jolanki R, Estlander T, Aitio A (1997) Hand dermatitis and allergic patch test reactions caused by nickel in electroplaters. Contact Dermatitis 36(3):137–140PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Kickinger-Lörsch A, Bruckner T, Mahler V (2015) Nickel and cobalt release from metal alloys of tools-a current analysis in Germany. Contact Dermatitis 73(5):289–295.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12462PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Koh D, Foulds IS, Aw TC (1990) Dermatological hazards in the electronics industry. Contact Dermatitis 22(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Lagrelius M, Wahlgren CF, Matura M, Kull I, Lidén C (2016) High prevalence of contact allergy in adolescence: results from the population-based BAMSE birth cohort. Contact Dermatitis 74(1):44–51.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Lidén C (1994a) Cold-impregnated aluminium. A new source of nickel exposure. Contact Dermatitis 31(1):22–24PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Lidén C (1994b) Occupational contact dermatitis due to nickel allergy. Sci Total Environ 148(2–3):283–285PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Lidén C (2018) Metal allergy: nickel. In: Chen CJ, Thyssen JP (eds) Metal allergy – from dermatitis to implant and device failure. Springer (in press)Google Scholar
  49. Lidén C, Carter S (2001) Nickel release from coins. Contact Dermatitis 44(3):160–165PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Lidén C, Wahlberg JE (1994) Cross-reactivity to metal compounds studied in guinea pigs induced with chromate or cobalt. Acta Derm Venereol 74(5):341–343PubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. Lidén C, Menné T, Burrows D (1996) Nickel-containing alloys and platings and their ability to cause dermatitis. Br J Dermatol 134(2):193–198PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Lidén C, Röndell E, Skare L, Nalbanti A (1998) Nickel release from tools on the Swedish market. Contact Dermatitis 39(3):127–131.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1998.tb05861.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Lidén C, Skare L, Lind B, Nise G, Vahter M (2006) Assessment of skin exposure to nickel, chromium and cobalt by acid wipe sampling and ICP-MS. Contact Dermatitis 54(5):233–238.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0105-1873.2006.00736.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lidén C, Skare L, Nise G, Vahter M (2008a) Deposition of nickel, chromium, and cobalt on the skin in some occupations – assessment by acid wipe sampling. Contact Dermatitis 58(6):347–354.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2008.01326.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Lidén C, Skare L, Vahter M (2008b) Release of nickel from coins and deposition onto skin from coin handling – comparing euro coins and SEK. Contact Dermatitis 59(1):31–37.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2008.01363.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lidén C, Bruze M, Thyssen JP, Menné T (2011) Metals. In: Johansen JD, Frosch P, Lepoittevin J-P (eds) Contact dermatitis, 5th edn. Springer, Berlin, pp 643–680CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Lidén C, Andersson N, Julander A, Matura M (2016) Cobalt allergy: suitable test concentration, and concomitant reactivity to nickel and chromium. Contact Dermatitis 74(6):360–367.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12568PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Liskowsky J, Geier J, Bauer A (2011) Contact allergy in the cleaning industry: analysis of contact allergy surveillance data of the Information Network of Departments of Dermatology. Contact Dermatitis 65(3):159–166.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2011.01937.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Martin SF (2015) New concepts in cutaneous allergy. Contact Dermatitis 72(1):2–10.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Meding B, Barregård L, Marcus K (1994) Hand eczema in car mechanics. Contact Dermatitis 30(3):129–134.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1994.tb00692.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Meding B, Lidén C, Berglind N (2001) Self-diagnosed dermatitis in adults. Results from a population survey in Stockholm. Contact Dermatitis 45(6):341–345PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Menné T, Borgan O, Green A (1982) Nickel allergy and hand dermatitis in a stratified sample of the Danish female population: an epidemiological study including a statistic appendix. Acta Derm Venereol 62(1):35–41PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. Menné T et al (1987) Patch test reactivity to nickel alloys. Contact Dermatitis 16(5):255–259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. O’Connell RL, White IR, McFadden JP, White JM (2010) Hairdressers with dermatitis should always be patch tested regardless of atopy status. Contact Dermatitis 62(3):177–181.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2009.01696.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Peltonen L (1979) Nickel sensitivity in the general population. Contact Dermatitis 5(1):27–32.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.1979.tb05531.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Ringborg E, Lidén C, Julander A (2016) Nickel on the market: a baseline survey of articles in ‘prolonged contact’ with skin. Contact Dermatitis 75(2):77–81.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12602PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Rui F et al (2010) Nickel, cobalt and chromate sensitization and occupation. Contact Dermatitis 62(4):225–231.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2009.01650.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Schwartz L, Tulipan L, Birmingham DJ (1957) Occupational diseases of the skin, 3rd edn. Lea & Febiger, PhiladelphiaGoogle Scholar
  69. Schwensen JF et al (2014) Occupational contact dermatitis in hairdressers: an analysis of patch test data from the Danish Contact Dermatitis Group, 2002–2011. Contact Dermatitis 70(4):233–237.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12176PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Shiao JS, Sheu HM, Chen CJ, Tsai PJ, Guo YL (2004) Prevalence and risk factors of occupational hand dermatoses in electronics workers. Toxicol Ind Health 20(1–5):1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1191/0748233704th193oaPubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. Shum KW, Meyer JD, Chen Y, Cherry N, Gawkrodger DJ (2003) Occupational contact dermatitis to nickel: experience of the British dermatologists (EPIDERM) and occupational physicians (OPRA) surveillance schemes. Occup Environ Med 60(12):954–957.  https://doi.org/10.1136/oem.60.12.954PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Tan HH, Tsu-Li Chan M, Goh CL (1997) Occupational skin disease in workers from the electronics industry in Singapore. Am J Contact Dermat 8(4):210–214PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. Thyssen JP, Linneberg A, Menné T, Johansen JD (2007) The epidemiology of contact allergy in the general population – prevalence and main findings. Contact Dermatitis 57(5):287–299.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2007.01220.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. Thyssen JP, Linneberg A, Menné T, Nielsen NH, Johansen JD (2009a) The association between hand eczema and nickel allergy has weakened among young women in the general population following the Danish nickel regulation: results from two cross-sectional studies. Contact Dermatitis 61(6):342–348  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2009.01625.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Thyssen JP, Linneberg A, Menné T, Nielsen NH, Johansen JD (2009b) Contact allergy to allergens of the TRUE-test (panels 1 and 2) has decreased modestly in the general population. Br J Dermatol 161(5):1124–1129.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2133.2009.09325.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Thyssen JP et al (2010) Sensitivity and specificity of the nickel spot (dimethylglyoxime) test. Contact Dermatitis 62(5):279–288.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2010.01709.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Thyssen JP et al (2011a) Excessive nickel release from earrings purchased from independent shops and street markets – a field study from Warsaw and London. JEADV 25(9):1021–1026.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-3083.2010.03909.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Thyssen JP et al (2011b) The EU Nickel Directive revisited – future steps towards better protection against nickel allergy. Contact Dermatitis 64(3):121–125.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2010.01852.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Thyssen JP, Gawkrodger DJ, White IR, Julander A, Menné T, Lidén C (2013) Coin exposure may cause allergic nickel dermatitis: a review. Contact Dermatitis 68(1):3–14.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0536.2012.02127.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Thyssen JP, McFadden JP, Kimber I (2014) The multiple factors affecting the association between atopic dermatitis and contact sensitization. Allergy 69(1):28–36.  https://doi.org/10.1111/all.12358PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Uter W et al (2016) ESSCA results with nickel, cobalt and chromium, 2009–2012. Contact Dermatitis 75(2):117–121.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12582PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Valks R, Conde-Salazar L, Malfeito J, Ledo S (2005) Contact dermatitis in hairdressers, 10 years later: patch-test results in 300 hairdressers (1994 to 2003) and comparison with previous study. Dermatitis 16(1):28–31PubMedGoogle Scholar
  83. Veien NK, Menné T (2011) Systemic contact dermatitis. In: Johansen JD, Frosch PJ, Lepoittevin JP (eds) Contact dermatitis, 5th edn. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 347–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. Vennegaard MT et al (2014) Epicutaneous exposure to nickel induces nickel allergy in mice via a MyD88-dependent and interleukin-1-dependent pathway. Contact Dermatitis 71(4):224–232.  https://doi.org/10.1111/cod.12270PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. Wahlberg JE (1975) Nickel allergy and atopy in hairdressers. Contact Dermatitis 1(3):161–165PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Wahlberg JE (1989) Nickel: animal sensitization assays. In: Maibach HI, Menné T (eds) Nickel and the skin: immunology and toxicology. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  87. Wahlberg JE, Boman AS (1992) Cross-reactivity to palladium and nickel studied in the guinea-pig. Acta Derm Venereol 72(2):95–97PubMedGoogle Scholar
  88. Wahlberg JE, Lidén C (2000) Cross-reactivity patterns of cobalt and nickel studied with repeated open applications (ROATS) to the skin of guinea pigs. Am J Contact Dermat 11(1):42–48PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Wall LM, Calnan CD (1980) Occupational nickel dermatitis in the electroforming industry. Contact Dermatitis 6(6):414–420PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Warshaw EM et al (2010) Positivity ratio and reaction index: patch-test quality-control metrics applied to the north American contact dermatitis group database. Dermatitis 21(2):91–97PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. White JM et al (2007) A general population from Thailand: incidence of common allergens with emphasis on para-phenylenediamine. Clin Exp Allergy 37(12):1848–1853.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2222.2007.02846.xPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of Environmental MedicineKarolinska InstitutetStockholmSweden

Personalised recommendations