Oral diseases · 2015
Clinical characteristics of lichen and dysplasia vs lichen planus cases and dysplasia cases.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Czerninski R, Zeituni S, Maly A, Basile J
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: To compare the clinical characteristics of lichen planus with dysplasia (LD) cases with oral dysplasia (DYS), and LP/lichenoid reaction (LP/LR).
METHODS: Patients treated at the Department of Oral Medicine with a histological diagnosis were included. Patient information (age, gender, ethnicity, smoking habits, and medical status) and parameters of oral manifestation (lesions' distribution, site, and type) were compared.
RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty five patients were included. 54% were never smokers and 25% were current smokers. The LD group (n = 79) had more bilateral cases when compared to the DYS group (n = 30), 70% to 40.7%, respectively (P = 0.008), and a lower average age [56-62, respectively (P = 0.043)]. All other parameters were similar. When compared to LR patients, the LD group had a higher percentage of men [41.8-27.9%, respectively (P = 0.08)] while all other parameters were similar.
CONCLUSIONS: As clinical characteristics of LD are more similar to the LP and LR group than to dysplasia, these findings may indicate that LD should be considered as part of the lichen planus disorder spectrum rather than a separate entity, although further analysis of larger groups is warranted. These results support the need for clinical follow-up among patients diagnosed with lichenoid changes.
METHODS: Patients treated at the Department of Oral Medicine with a histological diagnosis were included. Patient information (age, gender, ethnicity, smoking habits, and medical status) and parameters of oral manifestation (lesions' distribution, site, and type) were compared.
RESULTS: Two hundred and thirty five patients were included. 54% were never smokers and 25% were current smokers. The LD group (n = 79) had more bilateral cases when compared to the DYS group (n = 30), 70% to 40.7%, respectively (P = 0.008), and a lower average age [56-62, respectively (P = 0.043)]. All other parameters were similar. When compared to LR patients, the LD group had a higher percentage of men [41.8-27.9%, respectively (P = 0.08)] while all other parameters were similar.
CONCLUSIONS: As clinical characteristics of LD are more similar to the LP and LR group than to dysplasia, these findings may indicate that LD should be considered as part of the lichen planus disorder spectrum rather than a separate entity, although further analysis of larger groups is warranted. These results support the need for clinical follow-up among patients diagnosed with lichenoid changes.