Oral surgery, oral medicine, oral pathology and oral radiology · 2023
Clinical management of salivary gland hypofunction in patients with head and neck cancer: a scoping review of physical salivary stimulation methods.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАScoping ReviewНазвание 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.
Coelho Camila Pinho E Souza, de Melo Jéssica Luiza Mendonça Albuquerque, Nunes Fernanda de Paula E Silva, Guimarães Maria do Carmo Machado, Heller Debora, Grisi Daniela Corrêa, Dame-Teixeira Naile
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE(S): This scoping review aims to map the scientific literature on the therapies currently available for physical salivary stimulation in individuals with hyposalivation caused by radiotherapy.
STUDY DESIGN: Studies were included when they comprised the target population of adult individuals receiving radiotherapy of the head and neck region and who developed or were at risk of developing hyposalivation. Two reviewers selected the studies and extracted data on the type of physical salivary stimulation therapy used, the degree of glandular tissue involvement, and the percentage of salivary flow alteration. Therapies were classified according to either prophylactic application (before/during radiotherapy) or therapeutic application (post-radiotherapy).
RESULTS: Sixteen articles were included: 4 tested transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), 3 studied low-level lasers, 7 researched acupunctures, and 2 investigated acupuncture-like TENS. The outcomes of the prophylactic studies indicated beneficial effects (similar salivary flow or reduced salivary flow loss), although most studies did not include a comparable control group. Therapeutic studies presented conflicting results.
CONCLUSION(S): Prophylactic therapies of physical salivary stimulation may produce better effects than therapeutic applications. However, the protocols best indicated could not be defined. Well-designed, controlled clinical trials should be researched in the future to support the clinical recommendation of any of these treatments.
STUDY DESIGN: Studies were included when they comprised the target population of adult individuals receiving radiotherapy of the head and neck region and who developed or were at risk of developing hyposalivation. Two reviewers selected the studies and extracted data on the type of physical salivary stimulation therapy used, the degree of glandular tissue involvement, and the percentage of salivary flow alteration. Therapies were classified according to either prophylactic application (before/during radiotherapy) or therapeutic application (post-radiotherapy).
RESULTS: Sixteen articles were included: 4 tested transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS), 3 studied low-level lasers, 7 researched acupunctures, and 2 investigated acupuncture-like TENS. The outcomes of the prophylactic studies indicated beneficial effects (similar salivary flow or reduced salivary flow loss), although most studies did not include a comparable control group. Therapeutic studies presented conflicting results.
CONCLUSION(S): Prophylactic therapies of physical salivary stimulation may produce better effects than therapeutic applications. However, the protocols best indicated could not be defined. Well-designed, controlled clinical trials should be researched in the future to support the clinical recommendation of any of these treatments.