Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology · 2023
The use of liquid formulation pentoxifylline and vitamin E in both established and as a prophylaxis for dental extractions "at risk" of osteoradionecrosis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Patel Vinod, Young Helen, Mellor Amy, Sproat Chris, Kwok Jerry, Cape Angela, Mahendran Krishantini
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Osteoradionecrosis (ORN) of the jaws remains one of the most debilitating complications of radiotherapy (RT) in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC). Liquid pentoxifylline and vitamin E (PVe) presents an alternative formulation to tablets for patients with dysphagia or enteric feeding.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of using a liquid formulation of PVe for both established ORN and as a prophylaxis to avoid its occurrence after dental extractions. A secondary objective was to determine patient-reported side effects in relation to the liquid formulation of PVe.
STUDY DESIGN: The clinical records of 111 patients with HNC who were prescribed liquid PVe were reviewed retrospectively (66 with established ORN and 45 as prophylaxis before an invasive dental procedure).
RESULTS: In established ORN, 44% healed, and 41% were stable. In the prophylaxis group, 96% of surgical sites healed completely, with 4% (n = 2) developing ORN. Most patients (89%) were able to tolerate liquid PVe. Of the 11% (n = 12) who could not tolerate this regime, the most commonly reported side effect was gastric irritation (n = 5/12), whereas no more than 1 patient reported dizziness, malaise, and bleeding.
CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective review suggests that liquid PVe is efficacious for both established ORN and as a prophylaxis. Side effects reported were similar to those recognized for the tablet formulation.
OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to assess the clinical outcomes of using a liquid formulation of PVe for both established ORN and as a prophylaxis to avoid its occurrence after dental extractions. A secondary objective was to determine patient-reported side effects in relation to the liquid formulation of PVe.
STUDY DESIGN: The clinical records of 111 patients with HNC who were prescribed liquid PVe were reviewed retrospectively (66 with established ORN and 45 as prophylaxis before an invasive dental procedure).
RESULTS: In established ORN, 44% healed, and 41% were stable. In the prophylaxis group, 96% of surgical sites healed completely, with 4% (n = 2) developing ORN. Most patients (89%) were able to tolerate liquid PVe. Of the 11% (n = 12) who could not tolerate this regime, the most commonly reported side effect was gastric irritation (n = 5/12), whereas no more than 1 patient reported dizziness, malaise, and bleeding.
CONCLUSIONS: This retrospective review suggests that liquid PVe is efficacious for both established ORN and as a prophylaxis. Side effects reported were similar to those recognized for the tablet formulation.