Head & neck · 1996
Whole salivary flow rates following submandibular gland resection.
Клиническое исследованиеКонтролируемое клиническое исследованиеСтатьяНазвание 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.
Jacob R F, Weber R S, King G E
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Patients with head and neck neoplasms receive therapeutic neck dissections which may include the submandibular gland unilaterally or bilaterally. The clinical consequences of salivary gland resection could be reduced salivary output, altered cariogenic microflora, and increased incidence of dental caries.
METHODS: This investigation evaluated whole salivary flow rates of patients who had received unilateral (n = 29) or bilateral (n = 8) submandibular gland resections and compared them with noncancer control subjects (n = 29).
RESULTS: Unstimulated and stimulated (paraffin) flow rates were significantly lower in both resection groups compared with those of the noncancer group, ranging from p < .002 to p < .02. Although flow rates were lower in the bilateral group than in the unilateral group, the differences between these two groups were statistically significant (p < .02) only for stimulated saliva. Xerostomia was reported by one third of the resection subjects.
CONCLUSION: In view of the significantly lower flow rates observed in the resection groups (especially for unstimulated saliva), topical fluoride therapy should be considered for those patients whose past caries activity would indicate an increased caries risk associated with partial loss of salivary function.
METHODS: This investigation evaluated whole salivary flow rates of patients who had received unilateral (n = 29) or bilateral (n = 8) submandibular gland resections and compared them with noncancer control subjects (n = 29).
RESULTS: Unstimulated and stimulated (paraffin) flow rates were significantly lower in both resection groups compared with those of the noncancer group, ranging from p < .002 to p < .02. Although flow rates were lower in the bilateral group than in the unilateral group, the differences between these two groups were statistically significant (p < .02) only for stimulated saliva. Xerostomia was reported by one third of the resection subjects.
CONCLUSION: In view of the significantly lower flow rates observed in the resection groups (especially for unstimulated saliva), topical fluoride therapy should be considered for those patients whose past caries activity would indicate an increased caries risk associated with partial loss of salivary function.