OBJECTIVE: To detail the efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) for the management of oral lichen planus (OLP) unresponsive to standard therapy. BACKGROUND: OLP is an inflammatory disease that can be painful, mainly in the atrophic and erosive forms. Numerous drugs have been used with dissimilar results, but most treatments are empiric. However, to date, the most commonly used and useful agents for the treatment of OLP are topical corticosteroids. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The investigators studied a prospective cohort of 13 patients affected by OLP, who received biostimulation with a pulsed diode laser (GaAs). Patients were exposed to a 904-nm pulsed infrared laser (4 J/cm(2) energy density per minute; spot size, 0.8 cm). Outcome variables, statistically evaluated, were as follows: the size of lesions, visual analogue score of pain, and stability of the obtained result in the follow-up period. RESULTS: We detailed significant reduction in lesion size and in reported pain. No reported complications or therapy side effects were observed in any of the patients treated. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that LLLT could be a possible treatment for patients with unresponsive OLP. These results, although not conclusive, are a step forward for enhanced management of this quite common condition; however, it would be interesting to the results would be the same with a greater number of patients or in a different clinical setting.
OBJECTIVE: To detail the efficacy of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) for the management of oral lichen planus (OLP) unresponsive to standard therapy. BACKGROUND: OLP is an inflammatory disease that can be painful, mainly in the atrophic and erosive forms. Numerous drugs have been used with dissimilar results, but most treatments are empiric. However, to date, the most commonly used and useful agents for the treatment of OLP are topical corticosteroids. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The investigators studied a prospective cohort of 13 patients affected by OLP, who received biostimulation with a pulsed diode laser (GaAs). Patients were exposed to a 904-nm pulsed infrared laser (4 J/cm(2) energy density per minute; spot size, 0.8 cm). Outcome variables, statistically evaluated, were as follows: the size of lesions, visual analogue score of pain, and stability of the obtained result in the follow-up period. RESULTS: We detailed significant reduction in lesion size and in reported pain. No reported complications or therapy side effects were observed in any of the patients treated. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that LLLT could be a possible treatment for patients with unresponsive OLP. These results, although not conclusive, are a step forward for enhanced management of this quite common condition; however, it would be interesting to the results would be the same with a greater number of patients or in a different clinical setting.