Information on Latex Protein Allergy and Gloves

The following text on Latex Protein Allergy is taken from a paper written by the Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia (RRIM) in January, 1998. This paper is an excellent reference for all glove users wanting to learn more about latex protein allergy. It also addresses some of the misinformation in the news media on the subject.  Shown here are excerpts from this paper.  The complete text can be found on the Internet within the the Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia Web site. Look for it within the Latex Protein Allergy Links section at http://www.lgm.gov.my.

Back to top

Latex Protein Allergy and Your Gloves
(RRIM, January 1998)

This document is written to redress the negative and often misinformed comments in the news media and on the Internet concerning latex protein allergy. We hope to present a more balanced account of the subject by giving full weight not only to the problem, but also to the efforts which have been and are being made to improve the situation.

The latex protein allergy affecting some users of latex products has caused great concern to both the medical profession and the latex product industry. The problem appears to have been triggered by the sudden upsurge in the use of latex gloves due to the AIDS scare in the late 1980s, when some gloves with high levels of allergenic proteins were produced.

To address the problem, a great deal of research has been carried out in Malaysia and other manufacturing countries, as well as in consumer countries in the West. While studies in Europe and USA have been largely concerned with the development of suitable diagnostic tests, efforts have been made in Malaysia to further improve quality of the products. Intensive R&D by the Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia (RRIM) has enabled Malaysian glove factories to produce gloves with superior qualities with low protein / allergen content. The use of such gloves will help to reduce the possibility of further sensitization.

Back to top

 

What is Latex Allergy?

The three types of adverse reactions associated with latex gloves affecting some users are shown in Table 1.

Table 1: Reaction Types Associated with Latex Gloves

Reaction type

Symptoms

Cause

Irritant contact dermatitis
(Non allergic)

Skin rash, dry flaky skin with papules, cracks and sores.

Residual soaps, hand cream, powder, temperature and pH extremes, disinfectants and incomplete hand rinsing.

Type IV - Chemical hypersensitivity
(Cell mediated allergy)

Eczema , appears at 48 to 96 hours post exposure by skin contact

Residues of chemicals used for processing of gloves, particularly, the thiurams and carbamates.

Type I - Latex protein hypersensitivity
(IgE mediated allergy)

Localized itching, burning or discomfort, urticaria (hives) within 5 to 60 minutes after contact, rhinitis, asthma and in very serious case, anaphylaxis (happens only rarely).

Immediate Residual extractable proteins found in natural rubber latex products.

While the irritant contact dermatitis and Type IV hypersensitivity have been known for many years, that of Type I hypersensitivity emerged only in the late 1980s. Type I hypersensitivity is not only caused by natural rubber (NR) latex products, but is frequently caused in some individuals by penicillin, other antibiotics, wasp and bee stings, and even some foods such as fruits and peanuts.

Back to top

 

Who is at Risk?

Of the three types, Type I hypersensitivity is considered to be the most serious one. The prevalence of this type of allergy among the general population is not exactly known, but estimates of less than 1% have been given. A number of high risk groups have been identified, and their incidences of occurrence as diagnosed by skin testing, have been reported (Table 2).

Table 2: Prevalence of various potential high-risk groups

Potential high risk group

Prevalence (%)

References

Healthcare workers

2.8 - 16.9

1 - 7

Spina bifida / multi-operated children

32 - 50.6

8, 9

Hairdressers and housekeepers

8 - 9.7

10, 11

Rubber industry workers

2 - 11

12, 13, 14

Back to top

 

Diagnosis of Latex Protein Allergy.

A complete medical history is an important indicator. A skin prick test is a sensitive and simple test for the allergy. It is in fact considered to be the "golden standard" test, although it could sometimes cause allergic reaction, if not properly performed. It involves pricking the skin, usually on the forearm, through a drop of test liquid containing the allergenic materials. It should only be carried out at medical centers with staff who are experienced and equipped to handle severe reactions. Swelling or redness at the test site indicates a positive reaction within minutes of application.

Blood tests can also be conducted by measuring the specific IgE antibodies in the serum using technique such as the radio-allergosorbent test (RAST). However, such tests lack high sensitivity of the clinical skin test. As with other medical tests, no single test result is one hundred percent accurate.

Once a positive diagnosis is determined, then the most sensible remedy is avoidance of NR latex proteins. It must be emphasized that proper diagnosis should be done and all hypersensitive persons should be identified so that they would not continue to expose themselves to the allergens to which they are sensitive. Otherwise, very unpleasant or serious consequences could result.

Back to top

What are Residual Extractable Proteins?

If latex is ultracentrifuged, the latex system can be separated into three fractions. The least dense upper fraction of rubber hydrocarbon particles forms the main ingredient of all rubber products. The other two fractions are usually removed to a great extent during processing.

NR latex contains about 1% of total proteins. About 3/4 is in the non-rubber phase of the latex, and it is water-soluble. When processed into latex concentrate, considerable amounts of these soluble proteins are removed. Further conversion of latex into a film, such as gloves, condoms or balloons, removes more of the soluble proteins, during leaching and washing steps, so that the remaining levels are very low. These residual proteins in the latex products are those which are implicated in the allergy.

Not all proteins in the residual extractable fraction cause the allergic reaction. So far, about nine of the potential allergens presents in the latex15 have been identified. This subject, together with the study of changes in proteins from latex to the product, is being intensively investigated.

Back to top

 

Allergic potential of latex gloves

Since the amount of residual extractable proteins present in latex products prepared from the same latex concentrate can vary, depending on the processing conditions they are subjected during manufacturing, not all gloves have the same amount of residual extractable proteins. For example, gloves that have been subjected to more thorough leaching during processing will have less extractable proteins then those that have not, although the latex used for both may have originated from the same source of supply. A sensitive and accurate method is needed to evaluate the allergic potential of these products. However, presently there is no universally agreed method for doing so. In fact, the tests adopted currently are of two main types: (1) measurement of total extractable proteins, and (2) assessment of allergenicity or allergen content.

Generally for routine testing, the much simpler and faster total extractable protein methods are used. As mentioned earlier, these tests are not specific to latex allergens. Therefore, for meaningful indication of the allergic potential, it is important that the extractable protein (EP) values produced, by whichever test used, should show significant correlation with the allergic response or the allergen contents of the samples analyzed. Such relationships have been demonstrated by the EP values generated from the RRIM modified Lowry test making this a very useful procedure.

Values by the RRIM modified Lowry (EPRRIM) have been reported to be very well correlated with those by ASTM (EPASTM).

Back to top

EP Levels of Gloves and Other Latex Products?

Extractable protein content of latex gloves has been found to vary from as low as less than 20 ug/g of glove to as high as more than 1000 ug/g (as measured by the RRIM modified Lowry test).

While the well-leached powdered gloves and the powder-free gloves usually have low EP contents, those of the poorly leached gloves have high EP contents. On the other hand, other latex products such as condoms, latex thread, balloon bags and teats have narrower EP range varying from less than 20 ug/g to about 200 ug/g. Chlorinated products such as catheters and most powder-free gloves always have very low EP values of below 100 ug/g.

Back to top

Are There "Safe" EP Levels?

For already sensitized and hypersensitive individuals, the only course is one of avoidance of latex. Some individuals who experience allergic reactions to latex proteins also show cross-reactive responses to proteins in foods (such as various fruits and nuts). These foods should also be avoided.

For the rest of the population, threshold level for sensitization is not known, but it is possible to obtain indication on extractable protein levels of low risk by identifying levels at which a great number of latex hypersensitive individuals do not react.

The RRIM, in collaboration with Dr. K. Turjanmaa of the Department of Dermatology, Tampere University in Finland, has shown20 that when latex hypersensitive subjects were skin tested with latex gloves of varying content of EPRRIM, about 60% of them indicated no allergic response at levels less than 400 ug/g. Up to 100% negative responses were observed at EPRRIM lower than about 100 ug/g in this study.

Subsequent collaborative work with Dr. T. Palosuo of the Department of Immunobiology, Institute of National Public Health in Helsinki, using ELISA-inhibition technique (which has been validated by the skin prick test) confirmed that gloves with EPRRIM of about 100 ug/g and less also have very low allergen contents21. These findings have provided very useful guidelines for not only the manufacturing of low protein/low allergenicity gloves, but also for selection of gloves by the users.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) of the USA has allowed "Low Protein Labeling" claim for the 510k submission by glove manufacturers since March 1995. However, no maximum EP levels have yet been specified, although claims below 50 ug/g (sensitivity limit of the ASTM modified Lowry test) is not permitted.

Back to top

 

Production of Low Protein Gloves.

Much effort has been made by many manufacturers in Malaysia to reduce the EP levels of their products. Approaches taken include:

The RRIM glove surveys revealed that EP levels decrease steadily from 1992 to 1996. Gloves with low EP content and low allergen level are now available, especially in Malaysia.

Back to top

 

Does Powder in Gloves Enhance the Allergy Reaction?

Powder is used in the manufacturing of gloves to facilitate easy donning as well as to prevent the glove surfaces from sticking together. The cornstarch powder used is, by itself, not an allergen. However, it is believed that powder could absorb some of the extractable proteins from gloves, becomes airborne, and inhalation of the aerosolized powder could cause sensitization. However, this mode of sensitization is a subject of debate.

It is often found that powder-free gloves have much lower extractable protein levels because of the manufacturing processes used in the production.

Nevertheless, it may be interesting to note that absorption of allergenic proteins by powder from gloves can only be viewed as serious if the gloves concerned have high EP contents. Absorption should be insignificant if the gloves are of low EP contents.

Back to top

 

Selection of Gloves for Safe Use.

The main function of wearing gloves is to protect the wearer against contamination of infectious materials particularly viruses, bacteria, infected blood and body fluids. Thus, the single most important criterion in glove selection is barrier protection, as defined by all users, including physicians, dentists, medical and non-medical workers and researchers.

The next most important criterion is strength, fit and comfort, that is, the ability for the glove to stretch, remain soft, and conform to the hand. Other important requirements include tactile sensitivity, the ability to grip thing well, and the ease of donning. It is widely acknowledged that NR latex gloves are unsurpassed in their range of properties25. Hence, selection of glove for safe use should be one of NR with the following properties:

However, for the latex sensitive individuals, selection should also be based on similar requirements, except that the gloves will have to be protein-free. This means the use of gloves made of non-NR materials should be the choice for them, although it may be difficult to find an alternative to latex that matches it in terms of its superior physical properties26.

Back to top

 

How do Non-Latex Gloves Perform as Compared to Natural Rubber Latex Gloves?

Although non-latex gloves may be protein-free, it must however, be remembered that the most important function of gloves is to provide barrier protection for the users to avoid contact with infectious materials. Thus far, latex gloves have been proven to have excellent barrier protective capability, and other superior physical properties.

On the other hand, non-latex synthetic gloves are generally known to lack the comfort and fit, as well as lower strength and endurance as compared to the latex gloves. Above all, their barrier properties are often inferior to those of latex gloves, as demonstrated in the case of vinyl gloves 27, 28.

Furthermore, it may be emphasized that non-latex gloves are not free from eliciting allergic reaction in some users. The fact that the same chemical compounding chemicals are used in their processing, they can also cause Type IV hypersensitivity. Therefore, unless one is latex sensitive, the glove of choice should clearly be that of latex.

Back to top

 

Maximum Performance of Latex Gloves.

For maximum performance of latex gloves, care should be taken to ensure proper storage and correct usage of the products. Rubber tends to deteriorate with prolonged aging, especially in warm climate. Therefore, they should be kept in containers and stored in a cool dry place. Storage for an unnecessarily long period is not recommended. As soon as signs of deterioration appear (e.g. tackiness, brittleness, acrid odor), the gloves should be destroyed.

Correct usage of latex gloves is also important. For long operational procedures, there is a need to change gloves at regular intervals to prevent accumulation of fluids in the gloves. For challenging procedures, which could sometimes result in holes and cuts, the use of double gloving is recommended to provide maximum protection. The contact with oil-based antiseptics, phenols and their derivatives, petroleum-based grease, kerosene and other related organic compounds, should be avoided.

Back to top

References.

  1. Turjanmaa K. (1987). Incidence of immediate allergy to latex gloves in hospital personnel. Contact Dermatitis, 17, 270.

  2. Arellano R., Bradley J. and Sussman G. (1992) Prevalence of latex sensitization among hospital physicians occupationally exposed to latex gloves. Anesthesiology, 77, 314.

  3. Lagier F., Vervloet D., Lhermet I., Poyen D. and Charpin D. (1992) Prevalence of latex allergy in operating room nurses. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 90, 319.

  4. Yassin M., Lierl M., Fischer T., OÍBrien K., cross J. and Steinmetz C. (1994) Latex allergy in hospital employees. Ann. Allergy, 72, 245.

  5. Wrangsj` K., Osterman K. and Van Hage-Hamsten M. (1994) Glove-related skin symptoms among operating theatre and dental care unit personnel (II). Clinical examination, tests and laboratory findings indicating latex allergy. Contact Dermatitis, 30, 139.

  6. Vandenplas O., Delwiche J.P., Evrard G., Aimont P, Vanderbrempt X., Jamart J. and Delaunois L. (1995) Prevalence of occupational asthma due to latex among hospital personnel. Am. J. Resp. Critic Care Medicine, 151, 54.

  7. Turjanmaa K., Cacioli P., Thompson R., Simlote P. and Lopez M. (1995) Frequency of natural rubber latex allergy among US operating room nurses using skin prick testing . (Abstract). J. Allergy Clin. Immunol., 95, 214.

  8. Teerartkul A., Dangsuwan T., Wittitsuwannakul R., Kerdsomnuk S., Sawaengsakdi L., Roengrak S., Wititsuwannakul D. And Vichanond P. (1997) Epideniology of latex allergy among healthcare personnel at Siriaj Hospital. Siriaj Hosp Gaz. 49(9), 837.

  9. Moneret-Vautrin D.A., Beaudouine E., Widmer S., Mouton C., Kanny G., Prestat F., Kohler C. and Feldmann L. (1993) Prospective study of risk factors in natural rubber latex hypersensitivity. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol. 92, 668.

  10. Kelly K., Kurup V., Zacharisen M., Resnick A. and Fink J. (1993) Skin and serologic testing in the diagnosis of latex allergy. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol., 91, 1140.

  11. Sussman G.L., Beezhold D., Liss G. and Douglas A. (1994) Latex allergy in housekeeping personnel. Poster paper , Latex Allergy Symposium in Toronto, Canada.

  12. Van Der Walle H. and Brunsveld V. (1995) Latex allergy among hairdressers. Contact Dermatitis, 32, 177.

  13. Tarlo S., Wong L., Roos J. and Booth N. (1990) Occupational asthmacaused by latex in a surgical glove manufacturing plant. J. Allergy Clin. Immunol., 85, 626.

  14. Azizah M.R., Shahnaz M., Hasma H., Mok K.L., Esah Yip and Nasuruddin B.A. (1997) Latex protein allergy: A prevalenca study of factory workers. J. nat. Rubb. Res. 11(4), 240.

  15. Palosuo T. (1996) Identifying and quantifying natural rubber latex protein allergens. Proc. International conference on "Latex Protein Allergy: managing the issue", in Amsterdam, 11.

  16. Esah Yip (1994) Total extractable proteins of latex gloves as measured by different tests. Unpublished results. Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia.

  17. Esah Yip (1997) Measurements of total extractable proteins in latex gloves: A comparative study of the RRIM and ASTM tests. Proc. International Rubber Conference, Kuala Lumpur, 353.

  18. Esah Yip (1994) Determination of extractable proteins in latex products by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Latex Proteins and Glove Industry , Rubber Research Institute of Malaysia,41.

  19. Palosuo T., MSkinen-Kiljunen S., Alenius H., Reunala T., Esah Yip and Turjanmaa K. (1997) Measurement of natural rubber latex allergen levels in medical gloves by an allergen-specific IgE ELISA-inhibition, RAST-inhibition, and skin prick testing. To be published.

  20. Esah Yip, Turjanmaa K., Ng K.P. and Mok K.L. (1995) Residual extractable proteins and allergenicity of natural rubber products. Proc. International Conference on "Latex Protein Allergy: the latest position", in Paris, 33.

  21. Esah Yip, Palosuo T., Alenius H. and Turjanmaa K. (1997) Correlation between total extractable proteins and allergen levels of natural rubber latex gloves. J. nat. Rubber Research, in press.

  22. Ng K.P., Esah Yip and Mok K.L. (1994) Production of natural rubber latex gloves with low extractable protein content: Some practical recommendations. J. nat. Rubber Research, 9(2), 87.

  23. Nor Aisah Ab. Aziz (1994) Formulations for heat resistant chlorinated natural rubber latex films. J. nat. Rubber Research, 9(2) , 109.

  24. Towards powder-free low-protein latex gloves (1997) Malayisan Rubber Glove Manufacturers Association Newsletter, 2nd. Quarter (Editorial).

  25. Lai, P.F. (1997) Benefits versus the risk of using natural rubber latex gloves. Proc. International Rubber Conference, Kuala Lumpur, 370.

  26. Morris M.D. (1994) Health considerations of synthetic alternatives to natural rubber latex. J. nat. Rubber Research, 9(2) , 121.

  27. Korniewicz D.M., Laughon B., Cyr H., Lytle D. and Larson E. (1990) Leakage of virus through used vinyl and latex examination gloves. J. Clin. Microbiol, 28, 787.

  28. Korniewicz D.M., Kirwin M., Cresci K., Tian Sing, Tay Eng Choo, Wool M. and Larson E. (1994) Barrier protection with examination gloves: Double versus single. A.J.I.C. 22(1) , 12.

  29. Esah Yip, Turjanmaa K. and MSkinen-Kiljunen S. (1995) The "Non-allergenicity" of NR dry rubber products, with reference to Type I protein allergy. Rubber Developments, 48(3/4), 48. January, 1998

Back to top