| Literature DB >> 30642122 |
Dorina Lauritano1, Alberta Lucchese2, Federica Gabrione3, Dario Di Stasio4, Javier Silvestre Rangil5, Francesco Carinci6.
Abstract
Introduction: In the different branches of dentistry, the use of laser to solve different clinical situations is increasing due to numerous advantages that have been studied in literature since the 70s. Leucoplakia and hyperkeratosis can benefit from laser-assisted treatment. In most cases biopsy sampling, histological examination and, if no malignant cells are present, the follow-up is needed. However, even if the lesion is free of dysplasia patients often ask to eliminate these white spots that are always a cause of concern. Aim: From these numerous requests comes the idea of setting up a laser-assisted protocol as less invasive as possible to be offered to patients. The aim of the study is to find a laser-assisted protocol for the surgical excision of leucoplakia and hyperkeratosis that can both improve the clinical aspect of the lesion and be sustainable for patients. The null hypothesis has been identified in the following statement: the treatment is effective and efficient at the same time; where effectiveness was tested with the following criteria: size of the lesion, tactile perception, discomfort, pain; and efficiency with the following criteria: pain and discomfort perceived during the treatment. Materials and methods: To collect all data, a specially designed medical record was used. The diode laser was used with a pulsed mode and the maximum power corresponds to 1.8 W. No anaesthesia was used. Before laser-assisted treatment, the fibre was activated and was used with a contact overflowing.Entities:
Keywords: hyperkeratosis; laser; leucoplakia; oral medicine; oral surgery
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30642122 PMCID: PMC6352160 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph16020210
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Areas of lesions’ presentation.
Figure 2Year of onset of the lesions.
Regression analysis, the parameter that has been used was: coefficient, significance and coefficient of determination.
| Regression: Lesion Dimension T1 | ||
|---|---|---|
| Constant | Lesion Dimension T0 | |
| Coefficient | −8.5327 | 0.814990 |
| Std error of coef | 11.7132 | 0.03492 |
| t-ratio | −0.7285 | 23.3347 |
| Significance | 4756.97% | 0.0000 % |
| Beta-weight | 0.9839 | |
| Standard error of regression | 42.4721 | |
| Coefficient of determination | 96.80% | |
| Adjusted coef of determination | 96.62% | |
| Number of observation | 20 | |
| Residual degrees of freedom | 18 | |
| t-statistic for computing | ||
| 95% confidence intervals | 2.1009 | |
Figure 3Trend of discomfort perceived throughout the treatment. The data were divided as follow: discomfort felt before the patient was subjected to treatment, during irradiation of the lesion and in the days following the session. The data refer to the entire month of observation.
Figure 4In this graph can be seen the trend of tactile perception perceived throughout the treatment. The data were divided as follow: perception felt before the patient was subjected to treatment, right after the irradiation of the lesion and in the days following the session. The data refer to the entire month of observation.
Figure 5(a) Hyperkeratosis during the first visit: the area appears whitish and irregular, (b) The same area four weeks after treatment.
Figure 6(a): Mucosa of the left cheek of a patient affected by leucoplakia right after the removal of stitches positioned after biopsy sampling. (b): Same area three weeks after laser treatment.
Figure 7(a) Whitish and irregular area in the gingival mucosa. (b) Three weeks after the beginning of the treatment.