Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Biol Regul Homeost Agents ; 30(3): 889-894, 2016.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27655517

ABSTRACT

Oral mucositis (OM) may occur in up to 100% of patients undergoing condition regimen to hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT). From the patient’s perspective, OM is one of the most debilitating side effects of transplantation. It is commonly thought that oral hygiene can modify the incidence and severity of oral mucositis, therefore professional oral health care (POHC) is recommended prior to conditioning regimen for HSCT. A new strategy for the treatment of OM is sodium hyaluronate (SH) combined with amino acid precursors of collagen (Aas) (Mucosamin®). SH is a mucoaderent polymer acting as a mechanical barrier and pain reliever. Furthermore, it allows prolonged contact of the product with the mucous membrane. In this study, a total of 68 adult patients due to undergo HSCT for allogenic and autologous transplant were enrolled at the Stem Cell Transplant Unit. The patients were divided into two groups. One group was treated with POHC before HSCT and applications of Mucosamin® during the recovery after transplantation. The second group served as controls, with the usual treatment of Clorexidine 0.20% adopted by the department. After HSCT the same clinician, an expert in oral medicine trained for the clinical trial, evaluated symptoms of the patients’ mucositis of both groups every day. The treated patients developed less severe OM, therefore Mucosamin® seems to have a protective role against the more severe phases of mucositis. The maximum OM pain, measured with the VAS scale, was higher in patients who did not use Mucosamin®. In the treated group OM resolved sooner than in the control group.


Subject(s)
Amino Acids/therapeutic use , Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation , Hyaluronic Acid/therapeutic use , Stomatitis/drug therapy , Adult , Aerosols , Aged , Amino Acids/administration & dosage , Chlorhexidine/analogs & derivatives , Chlorhexidine/therapeutic use , Collagen/biosynthesis , Combined Modality Therapy , Female , Humans , Hyaluronic Acid/administration & dosage , Male , Middle Aged , Mouthwashes/therapeutic use , Oral Hygiene , Stomatitis/etiology , Stomatitis/prevention & control , Stomatitis/therapy , Transplantation Conditioning/adverse effects , Young Adult
2.
Osteoporos Int ; 24(5): 1707-12, 2013 May.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23288026

ABSTRACT

UNLABELLED: This prospective study compares two different surgical protocols with different degrees of invasiveness for tooth extraction in patients treated with oral bisphosphonates (BPs). No intraoperative complications were observed in either of the two groups, and there was no evidence of postoperative bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw in any of the extractions in the study group at follow-up (1,480 extractions). According to our data, dental extraction seems to be safe in osteoporotic patients treated with oral bisphosphonates. INTRODUCTION: Oral bisphosphonates are drugs commonly prescribed for the treatment of osteoporosis and other resorptive bone diseases. Since 2003, there have been numerous publications relating bisphosphonate-related osteonecrosis of the jaw (BRONJ) in patients using oral bisphosphonates, such as alendronate and risedronate. Most of the BRONJ cases reported in literature show a strong correlation with dental pathologies, dental extractions, and/or oral surgical procedures. METHODS: This study was conducted on 700 consecutive patients treated with oral bisphosphonates who underwent dental extractions. A total of 1,480 extractions were involved: 864 in the mandible and 616 in the maxilla. The patients were assigned randomly to one of two groups: 334 were treated with delicate surgery and closure by primary intention (Protocol A), and the other 366 were treated with nontraumatic avulsion and closure by secondary intention (Protocol B). All patients were administered with antibiotics coverage. RESULTS: Seven hundred patients with required removal of compromised teeth were included in the study. No intraoperative complications were observed in either of the two groups, and there was no evidence of postoperative bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw in any of the extractions in the study group at follow-up (1,480 extractions). CONCLUSIONS: The findings of this prospective study indicate that both suggested protocols for tooth extraction in patients treated with oral BPs can provide a predictable treatment outcome (100 % success). Therefore, because atraumatic surgery is more comfortable for patients, we suggest the adoption of Protocol B, which limits trauma to both the soft and hard tissues.


Subject(s)
Bone Density Conservation Agents/adverse effects , Osteoporosis/drug therapy , Tooth Extraction/methods , Administration, Oral , Aged , Bisphosphonate-Associated Osteonecrosis of the Jaw/prevention & control , Bone Density Conservation Agents/administration & dosage , Bone Density Conservation Agents/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Tooth Extraction/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Wound Closure Techniques , Wound Healing/drug effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...