ABSTRACT
Background: Oral submucous fibrosis (OSMF) was considered primarily as a disease prevalent in Southern Asia and southern Asian immigrants. However, it has been associated with an increased risk of malignant transformation and beginning to garner considerable attention world-wide. The main aim in management of OSMF is to relieve burning sensation and improve mouth opening. Aim and Objective: This study aimed to compare efficacy of curcumin (2 g) and topical clobetasol propionate (0.05%) cream in management of OSMF. Materials and Methods: This prospective and randomized study was conducted among sixty clinically diagnosed patients between age group of 18 and 50 years of age. They were randomly divided into two groups. Group A patients were instructed to apply topical clobetasol propionate cream (0.05%) thrice daily for 6 weeks. Group B patients were prescribed oral curcumin lozenges for 6 weeks. Recalls were done every week for up to 6 weeks for both groups for which burning sensation and mouth opening parameters were recorded. Results: The prevalence of OSMF was more in the younger age group which was due to increase in the chewing habit. Reduction in burning sensation was seen among patients in both groups but a significant reduction of 6.67 was seen with clobetasol group when compared with curcumin group with mean reduction of 2.53. Marked improvement in mouth opening was seen with Clobetasol ointment group when compared to curcumin group with a mean increase in mouth opening of 3.57 mm in the former and only 0.47 mm improvement in the latter. Conclusion: In the present study, both treatments were beneficial in reducing burning sensation significantly with clobetasol group showing better improvement as compared to curcumin group. There was a significant improvement in mouth opening with clobetasol group and nonsignificant results were obtained with curcumin group. Therefore, clobetasol can be opted as a drug of choice in improving mouth opening in OSMF patients.
ABSTRACT
Background: Clinically suspicious oral lesions are usually first dealt with an incisional biopsy. The management and treatment plan of these entities depends mainly on this report. The disparity in incisional and excisional biopsy report is an important area of concern affecting the patient’s management. Objective: Aim of the study was to compare retrospectively the incisional (presurgical) and excisional (post-surgical) biopsy reports of proven cases of carcinomas. Material and Methods: A total of 98 excisional biopsy cases of proved oral carcinoma were selected. Both incisional and excisional biopsy reports were retrieved. Sex predilection, Frequency of site of tumor, correlation between incisional and excisional biopsy, type of biopsy and change in the status were studied and statistically analyzed. Significance between Pre-biopsy and post biopsy was statistically analyzed using Chi-Square Tests. Results: There was concordance of 66.3% in incisional and excisional biopsy report. 33.7% cases showed disparity. Upgrading in the excisional biopsy report was noted in 15.30% cases. Downgrading was noted in 14.26% cases. When statistically analyzed the difference in pre-and post-biopsy was statistically insignificant. Conclusion: Incisional biopsy was found to have certain restriction in the valuation of Oral lesions. Clinicians should be vigilant the possibility of under diagnosis from incisional biopsy and even undetected carcinoma in the incisional specimen, especially of nonhomogeneous lesions.