Journal of oral pathology & medicine : official publication of the International Association of Oral Pathologists and the American Academy of Oral Pathology · 2007
A randomized-controlled trial to compare topical cyclosporin with triamcinolone acetonide for the treatment of oral lichen planus.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание 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.
Thongprasom Kobkan, Chaimusig Mantharop, Korkij Wiwat, Sererat Thanasit, Luangjarmekorn Lakana, Rojwattanasirivej Somsri
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Various treatments have been employed to treat symptomatic oral lichen planus (OLP), but a complete cure is very difficult to achieve because of its recalcitrant nature. Topical cyclosporin therapy of OLP has shown conflicting results in many reports. The purpose of this study was to compare the effectiveness of cyclosporin solution with triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% in orabase in the treatment of Thai patients with OLP.
METHODS: Thirteen Thai patients with symptomatic OLP and proven by biopsy were randomly assigned treatment with cyclosporin (six) or triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% (seven). The patients were instructed to apply cyclosporin or triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% three times daily at the marker lesions and affected areas. The assessments were at weeks 0, 2, 4, 8 by clinical scoring and grid measurement of the target lesions. Cyclosporin levels were assessed at weeks 2 and 8 of treatment. Pain and burning sensation were evaluated by linear visual analogue scale (0-10).
RESULTS: OLP patients in the triamcinolone acetonide group showed equal cases of clinical complete and partial remission (50%). Whereas, in the cyclosporin group, there was partial remission in only two cases (33.5%) and no response in four cases (66.7%). However, our study showed that there were no statistical differences in pain, burning sensation and clinical response in OLP patients between the two groups (P > 0.01). Moreover, five of six cases in the cyclosporin group developed side-effects such as transient burning sensation, itching, swelling lips, petechial haemorrhages and others.
CONCLUSION: Our results indicated that topical cyclosporin did not provide any beneficial effect and was not more effective than triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% in the treatment of Thai patients with symptomatic OLP.
METHODS: Thirteen Thai patients with symptomatic OLP and proven by biopsy were randomly assigned treatment with cyclosporin (six) or triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% (seven). The patients were instructed to apply cyclosporin or triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% three times daily at the marker lesions and affected areas. The assessments were at weeks 0, 2, 4, 8 by clinical scoring and grid measurement of the target lesions. Cyclosporin levels were assessed at weeks 2 and 8 of treatment. Pain and burning sensation were evaluated by linear visual analogue scale (0-10).
RESULTS: OLP patients in the triamcinolone acetonide group showed equal cases of clinical complete and partial remission (50%). Whereas, in the cyclosporin group, there was partial remission in only two cases (33.5%) and no response in four cases (66.7%). However, our study showed that there were no statistical differences in pain, burning sensation and clinical response in OLP patients between the two groups (P > 0.01). Moreover, five of six cases in the cyclosporin group developed side-effects such as transient burning sensation, itching, swelling lips, petechial haemorrhages and others.
CONCLUSION: Our results indicated that topical cyclosporin did not provide any beneficial effect and was not more effective than triamcinolone acetonide 0.1% in the treatment of Thai patients with symptomatic OLP.