ABSTRACT
Lobular capillary hemangioma, a benign vascular tumor of the skin or mucous membranes characterized by rapid growth and a friable surface, is widely but inappropriately termed pyogenic granuloma (now considered a misnomer by some theories) due to lack of evidence for infectious etiopathogenesis. Some studies promote the theory of a hyperplastic, neovascular response to an angiogenic stimulus with imbalance of promoters and inhibitors. Here we present a series of 4 cases of patients who visited the Oral Medicine OPD with a complaint of similar painless malformations showing granulomatous and/or fibrous tissue proliferation andwhich, after thorough history taking, clinical examination and excisional biopsy, were revealed to be lobular capillary hemangioma under histopathologic diagnosis. The following discussion revolves around the fact that, even though such exophytic lesions may present with variable features, a proper, accurate and logical diagnostic entity may be used to help in better coordination among the oral physician, oral pathologist and oral surgeon in framing the desired treatment plan.
Subject(s)
Granuloma, Pyogenic , Humans , Granuloma, Pyogenic/diagnosis , Granuloma, Pyogenic/etiology , Biopsy , HyperplasiaABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Tacrolimus is a powerful macrolide calcineurin inhibitor that has low adverse effects which lead to a rapid response in the control of signs and symptoms in comparison to that of corticosteroids in Oral Lichen Planus(OLP). There have been increasing number of studies establishing the use of topical tacrolimus in oral lichen planus. Still, there is a need to find evidence of the successful use of tacrolimus in comparison to other drugs used in the treatment of OLP, by means of a systematic review and meta-analysis, so that an informed and accurate approach can be utilized. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was performed, including PubMed, the Cochrane Library, published up to and including December 2021. There were no restrictions on date of publication. Articles available in English language were included. Using the Cochrane Collaboration tool, we assessed the risk of bias for randomized controlled trials. A meta-analysis was performed on the relevant studies. RESULTS: A total of 11 RCTs evaluating the effects of tacrolimus were included in this study after application of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Seven studies revealed a low bias risk, three presented a moderate risk and one had a high risk of bias. The results revealed no significant difference in clinical resolution and adverse effects between tacrolimus and corticosteroids. The pooled data from our meta-analysis shows that there is not sufficient evidence to prove that Tacrolimus is better in efficacy than other topical corticosteroids. CONCLUSION: According to the current systematic study and meta-analysis, there is not sufficient evidence to prove that Tacrolimus is better in efficacy than other drugs. Uniform trials are required with larger sample sizes and standardized methodology are required for a better analysis.
