Mamoru Murakami1, Yasuhiro Nishi, Yuji Kamashita, Eiichi Nagaoka. 1. Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Prosthodontics, Field of Oral and Maxillofacial Rehabilitation, Kagoshima University Graduate School of Medical and Dental Sciences, Kagoshima, Japan. kaku@dentb.hal.kagoshima-u.ac.jp
Abstract
PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine the relationship between oral dryness and medical treatment (medication, radiotherapy) for patients with maxillofacial prostheses. METHODS: Sixteen patients with maxillofacial prostheses were examined according to the following procedure. For evaluating oral dryness, oral moisture was measured at the lingual mucosa and the right and left buccal mucosa using a Moisture Checker Mucus. The mean value of each measurement was recorded as the moisture value (%). A value of 29% was used as a reference value to divide patients into a normal group and an oral dryness group. Patients with a moisture value of more than 29% were classified as normal. The clinical histories of the patients (including their current medication use and radiotherapy history-dose of radiation and period after radiation) were surveyed from their clinical records. Patients rated themselves on their feelings for oral dryness using a faces scale. RESULTS: The moisture value was significantly lower in the oral dryness group than the normal group. There was a significant difference in moisture values between the number of patients with and without radiotherapy, but not patients with and without medications. The moisture value had a significant negative correlation with the dose of radiation and a positive one with the period after radiation. The score of faces scale showed a significant negative correlation with moisture value. CONCLUSION: The patients with maxillofacial prostheses who had undergone radiotherapy need moisture retention because of oral dryness depending on the dose of radiation and the period after radiation.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine the relationship between oral dryness and medical treatment (medication, radiotherapy) for patients with maxillofacial prostheses. METHODS: Sixteen patients with maxillofacial prostheses were examined according to the following procedure. For evaluating oral dryness, oral moisture was measured at the lingual mucosa and the right and left buccal mucosa using a Moisture Checker Mucus. The mean value of each measurement was recorded as the moisture value (%). A value of 29% was used as a reference value to divide patients into a normal group and an oral dryness group. Patients with a moisture value of more than 29% were classified as normal. The clinical histories of the patients (including their current medication use and radiotherapy history-dose of radiation and period after radiation) were surveyed from their clinical records. Patients rated themselves on their feelings for oral dryness using a faces scale. RESULTS: The moisture value was significantly lower in the oral dryness group than the normal group. There was a significant difference in moisture values between the number of patients with and without radiotherapy, but not patients with and without medications. The moisture value had a significant negative correlation with the dose of radiation and a positive one with the period after radiation. The score of faces scale showed a significant negative correlation with moisture value. CONCLUSION: The patients with maxillofacial prostheses who had undergone radiotherapy need moisture retention because of oral dryness depending on the dose of radiation and the period after radiation.