4.6 Review

The effectiveness of topical forms of dexamethasone in the treatment of oral lichen planus- A systematic review

期刊

ORAL DISEASES
卷 28, 期 8, 页码 2063-2071

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/odi.13966

关键词

dexamethasone; oral lichen planus; oral pathology; treatment

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This systematic review compared the efficacy of dexamethasone with other treatments in oral lichen planus (OLP) and found that dexamethasone was more advantageous in some cases compared to photodynamic therapy and low-level laser therapy. However, due to limited study numbers, there is insufficient evidence to support the selection of treatment for OLP.
The goal of this systematic review was to assess the efficacy of dexamethasone compared to other treatments in oral lichen planus (OLP). The literature search used the following inclusion criteria: randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing dexamethasone and other treatment strategies in patients with OLP. The outcome measures included relief of symptoms, decrement of erosive area size, and changes in quality of life. A computer and manual search was performed in Pubmed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to January 31, 2021. The risk of bias was measured with the Revised Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for randomized trials. Eight trials with 131 study participants and 132 controls were identified. The following interventions were compared dexamethasone mouthwash, and 5% methylene blue-mediated photodynamic therapy, low-level laser therapy, amlexanox, clobetasol mouthwash, ketoconazole with amitriptyline, and thalidomide 1% paste. The therapeutic outcomes were more advantageous for dexamethasone in comparison with photodynamic therapy (PDT) (2 RCT) and low-level laser therapy (LLLT). Comparable effects were observed for dexamethasone, amlexanox, thalidomide, and PDT (1 RCT). Clobetasol showed more effective action than dexamethasone. Given the small sample sizes, heterogeneity and the few studies included, there is limited evidence to support the selection of treatment for OLP.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据