Swetha Singh Suresh1, Krunal Chokshi2, Sachin Desai3, Rahul Malu4, Achala Chokshi5. 1. Private Practicner, Department of Oral Pathology and Microbiology, Bangalore, Karnataka, India . 2. Senior Lecturer, Department of Pedodontics and Preventive Dentistry, Ahmedabad Dental College and Hospital , Bhadaj - Ranchodpura Road, Ahmedabad, India . 3. Senior Lecturer, Department of Periodontology, A.C.P.M. Dental College , Dhule, India . 4. Lecturer, Department of Prosthodontics, Terna Dental College , Nerul, Navi Mumbai, India . 5. Senior Lecturer, Department of Oral Pathology, Narsinhbhai Patel Dental College & Hospital , Visnagar, Gujarat, India .
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Oral Lichen Planus (OLP) is a chronic inflammatory, T-cell-mediated autoimmune oral mucosal disease with unclear aetiology. The clinical management of OLP poses considerable difficulties to the oral physician. AIM: The aim was to assess the efficacy of any form of intervention used to medically manage OLP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched and analysed the following databases (from January 1990 to December 2014):- Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE. All Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) for the medical management of OLP which compared active treatment with placebo or between active treatments were considered in this systematic review. Participants of any age, gender or race having symptomatic OLP (including mixed forms), unconnected to any identifiable cause (e.g. lichenoid drug reactions) and confirmed by histopathology have been included. Interventions of all types, including topical treatments or systemic drugs of variable dosage, duration & frequency of delivery have been considered. All the trials identified were appraised by five review authors and the data for all the trials were synthesised using specifically designed data extraction form. Binary data has been presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and continuous data as mean differences (MD) with 95% CIs. RESULTS: A total of 35 RCTs were included in this systematic review on medical management of OLP. No strong evidence suggesting superiority of any specific intervention in reducing pain and clinical signs of OLP were shown by the RCTs included here. CONCLUSION: Future RCTs on a larger scale, adopting standardized outcome assessing parameters should be considered.
INTRODUCTION:Oral Lichen Planus (OLP) is a chronic inflammatory, T-cell-mediated autoimmune oral mucosal disease with unclear aetiology. The clinical management of OLP poses considerable difficulties to the oral physician. AIM: The aim was to assess the efficacy of any form of intervention used to medically manage OLP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We searched and analysed the following databases (from January 1990 to December 2014):- Cochrane Oral Health Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE and EMBASE. All Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) for the medical management of OLP which compared active treatment with placebo or between active treatments were considered in this systematic review. Participants of any age, gender or race having symptomatic OLP (including mixed forms), unconnected to any identifiable cause (e.g. lichenoid drug reactions) and confirmed by histopathology have been included. Interventions of all types, including topical treatments or systemic drugs of variable dosage, duration & frequency of delivery have been considered. All the trials identified were appraised by five review authors and the data for all the trials were synthesised using specifically designed data extraction form. Binary data has been presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) and continuous data as mean differences (MD) with 95% CIs. RESULTS: A total of 35 RCTs were included in this systematic review on medical management of OLP. No strong evidence suggesting superiority of any specific intervention in reducing pain and clinical signs of OLP were shown by the RCTs included here. CONCLUSION: Future RCTs on a larger scale, adopting standardized outcome assessing parameters should be considered.
Authors: Nisheeth Saawarn; M C Shashikanth; Swati Saawarn; Vasanti Jirge; Nallan Csk Chaitanya; R Pinakapani Journal: Indian J Dent Res Date: 2011 Sep-Oct
Authors: D Conrotto; M Carbone; M Carrozzo; P Arduino; R Broccoletti; M Pentenero; S Gandolfo Journal: Br J Dermatol Date: 2006-01 Impact factor: 9.302
Authors: N Chainani-Wu; S Silverman; A Reingold; A Bostrom; C Mc Culloch; F Lozada-Nur; J Weintraub Journal: Phytomedicine Date: 2007-07-02 Impact factor: 5.340
Authors: Ashita R Kalaskar; Rahul R Bhowate; Ritesh R Kalaskar; Sheelpriya R Walde; Rachana D Ramteke; Priyanka P Banode Journal: Contemp Clin Dent Date: 2020-12-20